THE 


LAW  AND  PRACTICE 


OP   THE 


WRIT  OF  MANDAMUS, 


AS   IT   OBTAINS   BOTH   IN 


ENGLAND, 


AND 


IN   IRELAND. 


BY 

THOMAS    TAPPING, 

OF     THE     MIDDLE     TKMPLK     ESQ.,     BARRISTKR-AT-I,  AW 


PHILADELPHIA: 

T.  &  J.   W.   JOHNSON,   LAW  BOOKSELLERS, 

NO.    197    CHESTNUT    STREET.. 

1853. 


T 
W53 


KITE     &     WALTON,     PRINTERS, 
NO.    3    RANSTEAD    PLACE. 


TO 


!ir  Kolju  ^miB, 


HER  MAJESTY'S  ATTORNEY-GENERAL, 

M.,  P., 

&c.  &c.  &c. 

THIS   WORK, 

IS  WITH  HIS  KIND  PERMISSION, 
MOST  RESPECTFULLY  DEDICATED, 

BY  HIS  OBLIGED  SERVANT, 

THE   AUTHOR. 


PKEFACE. 


The  necessity  of  a  Work  upon  the  Law  and  Practice  of  the  High  Pre- 
rogative Writ  of  Mandamus,  was  made  known  to  the  Author  during  his 
pupilage  in  the  Chambers  of  a  Special  Pleader,  when  having  such  a  writ 
to  prepare,  he  was  informed  that  the  only  sources  from  whence  the  Stu- 
dent or  Practitioner  could  obtain  any  information  upon  this  most  import- 
ant branch  of  legal  learning,  were  the  cases  scattered  through  the  Books 
of  Reports,  excepting,  however,  the  brief  accounts  of  the  writ  which  were 
to  be  found  in  Compendious  Crown  Practices,  and  in  a  small  treatise  on 
the  subject  by  Impey,  published  in  1826,  which  last  mentioned  work  had 
been  rendered  useless  by  recent  statutory  enactments — namely — the  stats. 
1  Wm.  4,  c.  21;  1&  2  Wm.  4,  c.  58;  1  Vict.  c.  78;  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67, 
&c.,  &c. 

On  a  subsequent  occasion,  the  Author  again  felt  the  necessity  of  a 
specific  Treatise  upon  the  subject,  which  fact,  together  with  the  liberality 
with  which  for  the  benefit  of  the  subject,  and  the  advancement  of  justice, 
the  writ  has  of  late  years  been  dispensed  by  the  Court  of  B.  R.,  and  also, 
that  by  the  passing  of  the  remedial  statutes  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  as  to  Eng- 
land, and  the  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  as  to  Ireland,  it  is  clearly  the  general 
policy  of  the  Legislature,  to  promote  it  as  a  remedy,  induced  the  Author 
to  study,  and  consider  the  subject,  and  endeavour  to  supply  to  the  Pro- 
fession a  Work  which  would  at  least  be  useful.  The  result  of  his  labours 
is  the  present  Volume,  the  scheme  of  which  may  be  readily  seen,  by  a 
reference  to  the  Table  of  Contents. 

In  investigating  the  subject,  the  Author  has  endeavoured  to  give,  not 
only  as  well  all  the  legal  principles  which  govern  the  dispensation  of 


vi  PREFACE. 

the  writ,  as  the  decisions  which  have  relation  to  its  for mulse,  but  has  also 
constructed  an  Alphabetical  Series  of  the  subjects  of  those  matters  which 
from  the  earliest  cases  to  the  7th  Q.  B.  Reports  inclusive,  have  been  de- 
cided by  the  Court  of  B.  R.  to  be  cither  within  or  without  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  writ  of  mandamus.  It  is  trusted  that  this  scries,  which  extends 
over  above  250  pages,  will  be  found  useful  to  the  Practitioner,  as  thereby 
he  will  be  enabled  to  ascertain  at  a  glance  how  far  such  court  has  either 
dispensed  or  refused  the  writ  as  to  any  subject  respecting  which  its  inter- 
ference has  been  asked. 

The  Table  of  Cases  has  also  been  drawn  up  with  some  care,  and  differs 
from  tables  of  the  same  kind  in  two  particulars.  First,  that  to  each  Case 
is  affixed  the  names  of  the  Reports,  &c.,  in  which  it  is  to  be  found.  This 
was  rendered  necessary  by  the  occurrence  of  so  many  cases  of  the  same 
name,  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  Queen  is  invariably  the  prosecutor  of, 
and  that  corporations  or  artificial  persons  are  for  the  most  part  defend- 
ants to  the  writ.  Thus,  there  are  no  less  than  twenty-nine  cases,  each  of 
which  bears  the  name  of  R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.) ;  twenty-eight  of  the  name 
of  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  and  so  of  many  other  instances.  Secondly, 
that  to  each  case,  and  its  reference,  has  been  added  the  name  of  all  the 
concurrent  reports,  in  which  it  is  also  to  be  found,  in  order  that  the 
Practitioner  may,  by  a  perusal  of  all  the  authorities  of  the  same  case, 
determine  with  particularity  its  exact  legal  value,  the  importance  of  which 
will  be  readily  acknowledged  when  it  is  known  that  many  of  the  old 
Reporters  record  difterent  facts  of  the  same  case,  and  sometimes  disagree 
in  the  result  of  the  decision. 

The  Appendix,  together  with  a  few  specimens  of  the  "Writ  in  its  earlier 
phases  of  a  " Letter  Missive,"  ^'Parliamentary  Writ,''  "Writ  of  Resti- 
tution," &c.,  &c.,  contains  a  complete  collection  of  both  the  English  and 
Irish  statutory  enactments  on  the  subject;  also  a  list  of  the  Rules, 
Orders,  and  Regulations  made  by  the  Court  of  B.  R.,  in  pursuance  of 
the  Stat.  6  Vict.  c.  20,  for  the  government  of  the  practice  of  the  Crown 
side  of  such  Court  in  England,  and  a  Table  of  Fees  ordained  by  the 
Court  of  B.  R.,  under  the  authority  of  the  above  statute,  to  be  taken  by 
the  Queen's  Coroner  and  Attorney,  and  Master  on  the  Crown  side  of  such 
Court. 


PREFACE.  Vii 

It  will  be  seen  by  the  title  page,  that  this  Volume  professes  to  give  the 
law  and  practice  of  the  Writ  of  Mandamus  as  it  obtains  in  Ireland.  That 
this  object  has,  to  some  extent  at  least,  been  accomplished,  is  clear,  from 
the  fact,  that  the  Writ  of  Mandamus,  as  it  obtains  in  Ireland,  has  as  to  its 
formulse  been  made,  by  recent  statutory  enactments,  identical  with  that 
Writ  as  dispensed  in  England;  the  words  of  the  statutes,  relating  to  both 
portions  of  the  United  Kingdom  being,  for  the  most  part,  precisely  the 
same.  Thus  the  provisions  of  the  Irish  statute,  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  will  be 
found,  on  comparison,  to  be  totidem  verlis  with  those  of  9  Ann.  c.  20, 
and  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4.  Again,  the  Irish  statute,  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113, 
will,  on  examination,  be  found  to  contain  the  aggregate  provisions  of  the 
English  statutes,  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  58,  and  6  &  7  Vict. 
c.  67 ;  so  that  it  may  with  perfect  truth  be  affirmed,  that  the  formulse 
of  the  Writ,  as  it  obtains  in  England  and  Ireland,  are  governed  by  the 
same  statutory  enactment. 

How  far  the  Author  has  succeeded  in  his  endeavour  to  produce  a  Work, 
which  will  be  useful  to  the  Profession,  remains  for  the  Profession  itself  to 
judge.  The  Author  may  remark  that  the  labour  has  not  been  trifling, 
nor  the  care  small,  which  he  hag  bestowed  upon  its  production.  Errors 
there  may  be,  doubtless  many,  yet  he  trusts  that  the  vast  number  of,  and 
oftentimes  conflicting  authorities  cited,  may  entitle  his  Work  to  the  kind 
consideration  and  good  opinion  of  the  Profession. 

8,  Mitre  Coukt  Chambers,  Temple, 
16th  May,  1848. 


CONTENTS. 


The  Pages  referred  to  are  those  between  brackets.     [ 


CHAPTER  THE  FIRST. 


OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGH  PREROGATIVE  WRIT  OP  MAN- 
DAMUS .  ...  .1 


CHAPTER  THE  SECOND. 

A  DEFINITION  OF  THE  MODERN  WRIT  OP  MANDAMUS,  TOGETHER  WITH  A 
BRIEF  OUTLINE  OF  ITS  PROCEEDINGS  FROM  THEIR  COMMENCEMENT  TO 
THEIR  TERMINATION. 

Stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20;  Stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21;   Stat.  6&7  Vict.  c.  67.        .  4 


CHAPTER  THE  THIRD. 

OP  THE  LEGAL  PRINCIPLES  WHICH  GOVERN  THE  DISPENSATION  OF  THE 
WRIT  OP  MANDAMUS,  TOGETHER  WITH  AN  ALPHABETICAL  SERIES 
OP  THE  SUBJECTS  IN  RESPECT  WHEREOF  THE  WRIT  HAS  BEEN  EITHER 
GRANTED  OR  DENIED. 

The  Jurisdiction  of  the  Writ  of  Mandamus  .  .  .9 

The  Legal  Principles  which  govern  the  Dispensation  of  the  Writ  .         10 

The  absence  of  a  specific  Legal  remedy — Action — Amercement — Appeal — 

Case — Distress — Ecclesiastical  Jurisdiction — Equity — Lis  Pendens — Error — 

Execution — Fees,  withholding — Feigned  Issue — Indictment — Quare   Impe- 

dit — Quo  Warranto  .  .  .  .  .18 


CONTENTS. 


Qiialily  of  Prosecutor's  ritjljt  to  the  Writ  .  .  .27 

Ofthoso  sul'joct  to  the  Writ  .  .  .  •  29 

The  Siihjccis  alphabetically  arrangnd  as  to  which  the  Writ  has  been  either 

granted  or  refused  .....       29 — 231 


CHAPTER  THE  FOURTH. 

OF  THE  APPLICATION   TO  TUE  COURT,  AND  RULE  FOR  THE   WRIT  OF  MAN- 
DAMUS. 

Proceedings  before  Application — Demand  and  Refusal  .  282 

Demand — By  whom  made — When  to  be  made — To  whom  made — Form  of — 
Affidavits         .  .^  .  .  ;.  .     2-i2— 285 

Refu.sal — What — Form  of — By  whom  made — Affidavits — When  want  of  de- 
mand or  refiipal  to  bo  taken  advantairo  of  .  .         285 — 287 

Notice  of  application  to  Court  fur  the  writ  .  .  .         2^7 

Appmcation  for  Rule — Nature  of — By  whom  made — Against  whom  made — 
When  to  be  made — Affidavits  in  support  of  Rule — When  necessary — What 
to  contain — Renewing:  application  .  .  .     287 — 295 

Ri'LE — How  obtained — Motion  for,  to  what  Court,  when  granted — Nisi — Abso- 
lute in  first  instance — How  obtained — Form  of — Service  of — Notice  of — 
Affidavit  of  service  and  Notice — Enlarging  rule — Shewing  cause  against  rule 
nisi — How — Who  may — Rule  Absolute — When  granted — Against  whom  ob- 
tained— Form  of — IJow  obtained — Costs — Amendment  of  .     295 — 'MQ 

Compelling  Prosecutor  to  proceed  ....        306 


CHAPTER  THE  FIFTH. 

THE  WRIT  OF   MANDAMUS,  ITS  FORM,  ETC.,    TOGETHER  WITH  THE  SUBSE- 
QUENT PROCEEDINGS  ANTERIOR  TO  THE  RETURN. 

The  Writ — By  whom  prepared — Form  thereof,  Inducements,  .^vcrmrrits,  Sub- 
stance of  writ,  according  to  rule,  Direction,  Corporate  Body,  Officers,  Col- 
lege, Inhabitants  of  parish.  Parish  Officers,  Justices,  How  misdirection  waiv- 
ed or  taken  advantage  of — Inducement — Averments  of  Jurisdiction  of  Court, 
of  Prosecutor's  title,  of  Defendant's  duty — Of  demand  and  refusal — Of  ab- 
sence of  specific  legal  remedy — Mandatory  Clause — Teste  and  return-day — 
Indorsements — [low  sued  out — How  served — Filing  the  writ — Cross  and 
Cuncurrent  Writs — What — Motion  for — Rule  tor — Return — Costs — Alias 
and  pluries  Writs — When  granted — Amendment  of  writ — Supersedeas — 
Quasliing  writ  .....        3U8— 339 


CHAPTER  THE   SIXTH. 

OF  THE  RETURN,  ITS  FORM,    SUBSTANCE,  ETC.,    AND  OF  THOSE  FORMULAS 
WHEREBY  IT,  WHEN  DEFECTIVE,  MAY  BE  INVALIDATED. 

Return — By  whom  made,  Persons,  Corporations,  In  cases  within  1  Wm.  4,  c. 
21  (E.),  and  9  &.  10  Vict.  c.  113  (.1.) — Of  Returns  by  several  Corporations, 


CONTENTS.  XI 

Officers,  &.C. — When  to  be  made — How  enforced — Rule  to  return  Writ — 
The  Return — Wlien  necessary — The  species  of  return — Traverse — Form — 
Substance — Special  in  confession  and  Avoidance — Form — Substance — Double 
or  several  returns — Return  in  the  nature  of  Demurrer — Engrossing  return 
— Signing  and  Sealing — Swearing  return — Filing  return — Necessity  of — 
When  to  be  filed — How  filed — Slaying  filing — Taking  off  the  file — With- 
drawing return — Disavowing  return — Amendment  of  return — Invalidating 
return — Quashing — Application — Affidavits — Rule  nisi,  Shewing  Cause,  Rule 
absolute.  Demurrer,  Joinder  in  demurrer — Paper  Books,  Argument,  Judg- 
ment, Costs  .....  340—381 


CIIAPTEU  THE  SEVENTH. 

THE  PLEA,  REPLICATION,  AND  SUBSEQUENT  PROCEEDINGS  INCLUSIVE   OF 
THE  PEREMPTORY  WRIT  OF  MANDAMUS. 

Plea — What — Time  to  plead — Rule  to  plead — Enforcing  plea — Form  of  plea — 
Filing — Withdrawal  of  plea — Judgment  by  default — Demurrer  to  pleas — 
Replication — Rejoinder,  &c. — Rule  to  reply — Rejoin,  Joinder  in  demurrer, 
&,c. — Issue — Notice  of  Trial — Subpoena,  Record,  Jury  Process,  Trial,  Jeofails 
&c..  Amendments,  &c..  Verdict,  Damages,  Costs,  Judgment,  How  Signed — 
Entry  on  Roll,  How  entered — Nunc  pro  tunc — As  in  case  of  nonsuit — Non 
obstante  Veredicto — Motion  in  arrest  of  Judgment — Motion  for  a  new  Trial — 
Error — Writ  of  Error — Joinder  in  Error — Execution— Writs  of  Execution — 
Peremptory  Mandamus,  What,  When  granted — Against  whom — How  ob- 
tained— Motion  where  and  when  made — Rules  nisi  and  absolute — When 
Writ  peremptory  in  first  instance — Form  of  Writ — Hovi^  issued — Returns — 
Settinof  Writ  aside — Amendment  of  Writ        .  .  382—409 


CHAPTER  THE  EIGHTH. 

OP  VARIOUS  PROCEEDINGS  OF  OCCASIONAL    OCCURRENCE,    AND   ALSO  OP 
THE  SUBJECTS  OF  COSTS  AND  ATTACHMENT. 

Abatement  of  Writ — Interpleader — Special  Case — Costs— Feigned  Issue — 
Bill  of  Exceptions — Arbitration — Affidavits — When  required — How  entitled 
— Body  of  Affidavit — Jurat — Filing — Amendment  of  Costs — When  granted — 
Against  whom  granted — Bishop — Municipal  Corporation — Justices — Inhabi- 
tants, &,c., — Officers,  &c., — IIow  obtained — Motion  for — Affidavits — Rule 
nisi — Security  for  Costs — Forma  Pauperis — Taxation — Attachment — Nature 
of— When  granted— How  obtained — Motion— Rule  nisi— Shewing  cause- 
Writ,  form  of       .....  410—424 


Jul  CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  THE  NINTH. 

OF  THE  COLLATERAL  PROCEEDINGS  BY  WAY  OP  ACTION,  OR  CRIMINAL  IN- 
FORMATION, FOR  A  FALSE  RETURN  TO  A  WRIT  OF  MANDAMUS. 

Action  for  a  false  return — What  a  false  return — In  what  Court  to  be  brought 
— Plaintiffs — Defendants — Declaration — Evidence,  &.c. — Verdict,  &.c. — 
Error,  &c.— Costs  ....  425—432 

Information  for  a  false  return — When  it  lies — Motion,  Venue,  Evidence — 
Verdict  ......  432 


CONTENTS.  jciii 


APPENDIX. 


Form  A. — Letter  from  Hen.  4  to  certain  Sheriffs  to  raise  men  for  the  defence 
of  the  Kingdom  against  the  invasion  of  Owyen  Glcndourdy.  Dated 
Thursday,  26th  May,  2  Hen.  4,  1401.    -  -  -  435 

Form  B. — Privy  Seal,  commanding-  the  Treasurer  and  Chamberlains  of  the 
Exchequer  to  deliver  to  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln  certain  articles  of  plate, 
«Sic.  ----..  43G 

Form  C. — 6  Hen.  8 — Privy  seal,  directing  the  delivery  to  Ambassadors,  about 
to  repair  to  France,  of  the  treaty  of  Amboisc,  1492  -  436 

Form  D. — 3  Edw.  3 — A  writ  commanding  the  Treasurer  and  Chamberlains 
of  the  Exchequer  to  deliver  to  John  de  Stonore,  Chief  Justice  of  the 
Bench,  and  successors  of  Willielinus  de  Herle,  late  Chief  Justice  thereof, 
the  Rolls  which  had  been  brought  in  by  the  latter  -  4'Al 

A  precedent  of  the  Writ  of  Restitution  in  Anable's  case,  temp.  Hen.  6      437 


APPENDIX. 


OF  THE  ENGLISH  STATUTES  RELATING  TO  THE  SUBJECT 
MANDAMUS. 


Stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20  ....  439 

Stat.  1  Geo.  1,  s.  2,c.  13  ....  440 

Stat  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4  -  -  -  -  442 

Stat.  12  Geo.  3,  c.  21  -  -  -  -  444 

Stat.  38  Geo.  3,  c.  52  -  -  -  -  445 

Stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21  -  -  -  -  446 

Stat.  1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  58  -  -  -  -  448 

Stat.  1  Vict.  c.  78  ....  450 

Stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67  -  -  -  -  451 

Stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89  -  -  -  -  453 


CONTENTS. 


APPENDIX. 


OF  THE  IRISH  STATUTES  RELATING  TO  THE  SUBJECT 
MANDAMUS. 

Slat.  19  Geo.  2  c.  12  -  -  -  -  454 

Stat.  1  Win.  4,  c.  21  -  -  -  -  457 

Slat.  1  &  2  \Vm.  4,  c.  53  -  -  -  -  457 

Slat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113  -  -  -  -  459 


Rule?,  Orders,  and  Regulations  made  by  the  Court  of  B.  R.  in  pursuance  of 
Slat.  6  Vict.  c.  20,  for  the  Government  of  the  practice  of  the  Crown  side  of  such 
Court  in  England  -  -  -  _       461 

Table  of  Fees  established  and  ordained  by  the  Lord  Chief  Justice,  and 
Judges  of  her  Majesty's  Court  of  B.  R.  to  be  taken  by  the  Queen's  Coroner 
and  attorney,  and  Master  on  the  Crown  side  of  the  said  Court,  pursuant  to 
slat.  6  Vict.  c.  20  .  .  .  .  463 


TABLE     OF     CASES 


CITED   IN  THIS  VOLUME. 


Where  there  are  several  Cases  of  the  same  Name,  they  are  inserted  AlphabelicaUy  as 
to  the  Reports  in  which  they  arc  to  be  found. 


The  pages  referred  to  are  those  between  brackets  [ 


Aberystwith  (Case),  Stra.  1157  45, 
166,  246 
Adams  v.  Savage,  I  Earn.  299  278 
Addington  v.   Clode,  2   W.  Blac. 

lOao  162,  163,  164 

Adley  v.  Reeves,  2  M.  &  S.  53  123 
Allen  V.  Dundas,  3  T.  R.  128  34 

Amhurst's  case,  Ray.  214.  S.  C. 

2  Keb.  871.  S.  C.  1  Vent.  187  34, 
64,  86,  1U7,  1 1 1 
Andover's  case,  Holt,  442  249 

Andrews  v.    Cawthorne,    Wills, 

536  59 

V.  Lakin,  Noy.  139        356 

Anon.  3  A.  &  E.  552  59, 60 
Andr.  24.     See  S.  C.  Anon. 

1  Barn.  370,  425.     S.  C.  nom. 

Smith's  case,  Andr.  24  35 

1  Ham.  26  379 

1  Barn.  123, 135, 154  13.5, 

142,  170,  173,  280 


Anon.  2  Barn.  24 


100,  389 


2  Barn.  83     S.  C.  Stra.  26    220 


—  1  Barn.  138 

—  1  Barn.  153 

—  1  Barn.  155 

—  1  Ram.  195 

—  1  Ham.  227 

—  1  Barn.  252 

—  1  Barn.  327 

—  1  Barn.  362 

—  1  Barn.   370,    42.5.      R.    C. 
Andr.  24      See  Sinith's  Case.      35 

—  1  Barn.  4U2   41,  50,  84,  94,  313 


166 
l>-6 

70 

48 

55,  56,  407 

178 

4:^3 

346 


2  Barn.  106 
2B<in.  129 
2  Barn.  235 


344, 349,  389 
69 
29.5,  300 


—  2  Burn.  236,  237    185,  287,  288 
292,  295.  296,   303,  304,  329,  336 

—  2  Barn.  326  223 

—  2  Barn.  334,  348,  361.     S. 

C.  Stra.  956  33,  34,35,313 

—  2  Birn.  426  220 

—  2  Barn.  437  77,293 

—  2  Barn.  441  104,  109 


Burr.  235 

2  Chit.  251,  253 


2  Chit.  254 
2  Chit.  255 


■  2  Chit.  2.57 
2  Chit.  290 

■  Comb.  41 
Comb.  133 

•  Comb.  1.58 

•  Comb.  2.57 

•  Comb.  285 

■  Comb.  287 

-  Comb  289 

-  Comb.  327 

-  Comb.  347 

-  Comb.  478 

4.59 

-  Dyer,  48,  pi.  17 


167 

11.3,  138, 

174,  261 

211,  212,  220, 

289,298,314,318 

21,  54,  65,  70, 

73,  209,  263,  270 

167,  218,  22-1 

209,  293 

132, 173 

173 

104 

132 

90 

2.-;6 

280,  368 

4-J4 

19.  170,  173 

Carth. 

221,  222 

111 


s.  c. 


XVI 


TABLE     OF    CASKS. 


Anon.  Dyrr,  182  b. 

368 

Frecin.21 

68,  78,  89,  151, 

152,  258 

Frceni.  306 

70 

Frcem.  372 

33,34 

Gndb.  44,  pi.  52 

318 

Holt,  (556 

32,  35 

1  Keb.  79 

370 

1  Keb  101 

273, 366 

Keb.  286,  pi.  94 

211 

1  Lev.  148 

141 

Loftt.  148 

15,  55 

Lom.  185 

433 

Loin.  189 

131 

Loflt,  390 

154 

,  156,  1.57 

2  Lutw.  1012 

431 

MmicI).  101 

70,211,212 

March   141 

44 

1  AJ(xl.  79,  194 

65 

2  Mod.  31G 

174, 

181.  186, 
188,  310 

3  M(xl.  265 

98 

5  Mod.  374 

23, 

32,  35,  36 

278,  3^5 

6  Mod.  139     S. 

C.6 

Mod, 

161     S.  C.  Holt.  407        123 

6  Mod.  316 

1^6 

7  Mod.  118 

137,  2.57 

7  Mod,  140 

33,  34 

1 1  Mod.  137 

34 

11  Mod.  265 

333 

12  Mod.  164 

421,  422 

12  Mod.  232 

314,  35>s 

12  Mod.  348 

421 

12  Mod,  410.     S. 

C. 

nom. 

Lord  V.  Francis,  Holt,  170 

171, 

wliich  see 

:^73, 422 

12  Mod.  515.     S.C.  2Salk. 

699 

431 

12  Mod.  666   18, 

151, 

152,  15:^. 
249 

Noy.  139 

71 

Poph.  12 

89 

Rny.  431 

12,  351 

Ld.  Kaym.  9.59 

2-J9 

Ld.  Ha\  m  989 

97, 229 

2  Uo!l.'l(l7 

30, 

152,  277 

2    Salk.   428.     S.    C. 

Ld. 

Rayni    125,     nn7n. 

Green    v. 

Pope,     S.  C.  5  Mod 

316 

S. 

C.  Comb.  400.    S.  C. 

Skin 

607 
407,  429 

2  Salk.  4.30 

379.  431 

2  Salk  434     324,329, 

33:*.  422 

2Sfilk    436 

101,  3M7 

■  2  Salk.  525 

3  Salk.  202 
2  Show.  48 
2  Show.  1S3 


206,  SrS,  3:Ui 

337 

429 

277 

35.  196 


Anon.  1  Sid.  257  364, 365 

2  Sid.  114  33 

Stra.  63  103 

Stra.  5.50  33,  34,  35 

Stra.  552  105 

Stra.  686  69 

Stra.  696  41 

Sty.  151.  447  39,  199,  203 

Sty.  299  167,  185 

Sty.  346,   cited  in  Raym. 

101,  num.  Clerkenweli  Inhabi- 
tants' case  253 

Sty.  355  76,  260 

1  Vent.  115  70 

1  Vent.  267  68,  71,  356 

1  Vent.  335  277,  279 

1  Wils.  30  336,  338 

Anthony  v.  Leger,  1  Hagg.  10         72 
Appleford's  case,  1  Mod.  82.     S. 
C.  2  Keb.  299,  661,  nom.  R.  v. 
Appleford,  which  see  78,  138, 

170,  199,  253,  273,  274,  275,  359 
Argent   v.    St.    Paul's  (Dean)  3 

Doug.  238  430 

ArundeJl  v.  Arundell,  Yelv.  34     364 
Aslicroft  V.  Bourne,  3  B.   &.  Ad. 

684  142 

Askew's  Case,  (Dr.)  Burr.  2190        2, 

3,  9,  13,  19,  20,  30,  64,    176,   217, 

288 
Atty.  Gen.  v.  Clare  Hall,  3  Atk. 

662  273 

Austin  V.  Gervas,  2  Barn.  242  72 

Awdiey    v.  Joy,    Poph.    176.     S. 

C.  Noy,  78.     S.  C.  Latch.  123 

5.  81.  89,  90,  124.  164,   172,   197, 

211,  246,  262,  263,  269,  296,  364, 

365,  383 


B. 


Bngg's  case.  11  Rep.  93  b.         2,  31, 

39,  5o,  .56,  64.  74,  124,  172,   190, 

191,  194,  19.5.  196,  198,  199,  200, 

201,  2(12,  203,  204,  213,  25-5,  264, 

326,  346,  353,  354,  358,  364,  383, 

426,  432,  438 

Bagwell   V.  Jobson,  1  Barn.   144  2()6 

Bailiff's  case.  Comb.  133  153 

Baily  v.  Boorne,  Stra.  392  110 

Baker  v.  Baker,  Trem.  P.  C.  505  321 

Baketon's  case  267 

Ballard  v.  Jerrard,  12  Mod.  609 

116,  249 
Banker's  case.  S.  C.  nom.  R. 
V.  Hornby,  5  Mod.  29.  S.  C. 
14  Mow.  St.  Tr.  1.  S.  C. 
Ilarir  St.  Tr.  136,  and  4  A.  & 
E.  996.     S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  508. 

216,  265 


TABLE    OF     CASES. 


XVU 


Barnard iston's  case,  Sty.  542         247 
Barnstable's  case  (Mayor,)  Ray. 

153  356 

Barrow    v.  Croft,    4  B.   &   C. 

388.     S.  C.  6  D.  &  R.  386         396 
Barry  v.  Arnaud,  10  A.  &  E.  6-56 

115 

Basset  v.  Chichester  or  Barnstable 

(Mayor)  1  Sid.  286  192,  246, 

247,  401,  402,  403 

Bate's  case,  1  Vent.  41  255 

Bath  V.  Hawley  (Lord),  2  Keb. 

770,  797  247 

Batson  v.  Sayer,  Stra.  728  431 

Battey  v.  Tovvnrow,  4  Camp.  5       128 
Bentley's  case  (Dr.),  2  Barn.  19, 
22.  S.  C.  8  Mod.  148,  151.    S. 
C.  nom.  R.  v.  Bentley,  Stra.  912. 
S.  C.  Fort.  202, 206  193,  195, 

201,  202,  203,  267,  273 
Bentley  (Dr.)  v.  Ely  (Ep.)l  Barn. 

453  77 

Berkshire's(Countess)case 32, 35,  277 
Bernadiston's  case,  1  Vent.  146  362 
Birmingham  Railway  v.  White,  1 

Q.  B.  282  121 

Bishop's  case,  2  Roll.  71, 106, 107 

68,71,280 
Blackborough  v.  Davis,  1  Com.  96. 
S.  C.  2Com.  108.  S.  C.  1  Salk. 
251.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  615.  S.  C. 
Holt,  43.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  648. 
S.  C.  1  P.  Wms.41,  42,  46  10, 
14,  33,  34,  35.  36,  108,  112,  146 

277 
Blagra ve's  case,  2  Sid.  49, 72,  nom. 
Blagrave  v.  Reading  (Mayor)        175, 
245,  246,  247,  264 
Bishop  V,  Hatch,  1  A.  &  E.  676. 

S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  622  85 

Bishopsgate  v.  Beecher,  8  Mod,  10. 

S.  C.  1  Bott.  79  220,  222,  224 

Blakemore  v.  Glamorgansh.  Canal, 

1  M.  &  K.  154  41,  244 

Bodmin  v.  VVarlingen,  Boit.  733  230, 

237 

Boon's  case,  P.  1652  33,  277 

Boorman's  case,  March.  177  139 

Bossiney's  case,  Stra.   1003,  see 

R.  V.  Bossiney      45,  166,  180,  181, 

182,  246,  334 

Boston's  Clerks'  case  262,  263 

Boswell's  case,  6  Rep.  48  b.  181, 

182,  246 

Boswell  V.  Milbank,  1  T.  R.  399, 

n.  (d),  see  Powel  v.  Milbank,  26  114 
Bowers  v.  Littlewood,  1  P.  Wms. 

594  36 

Bowles  V.  Neale,  7  C.  &  P.  262    212, 

432 
April,  1852.— 2 


Braithwaite's  case,  1  Vent.  19 

2(13,  351,  355,  350,  b70,  371, 
Braithwaite's  case,  1  Doug.   182, 

Breeden  v.  Gill,  5  Mod.  275  179, 
Brett's  case.  Comb.  214 
Brewers'    Company    v.     Benson, 

Barnes,  236 
Brideoak's  case,  1  W.  Blac.  25n. 
17, 16,  78, 
Brook  V.  Ewers,  Stra.  113      104, 

V.  Turner,  1  Mod.  211 


Bruce'scase  (Lord)  Stra.  819 

Buckley  v.  Palmer,  2  Salk.  431 

401,  402,  406, 
Burgh  V.  Blount,  10  Mod.  350 
Burrell  v.  iN'icholson,  3  B.  &  Ad. 
649 

Butler  V. ,  12  Mod.  371 

(Dr.)  V.  Cobbet,  11  Mod. 

254  220,  309, 

V.  Rews,  12  Mod.  349 

429, 
Buxton  V.  Singleton,  3  Keb.  432 
109,  110, 
C. 


39 

428 

428 

101 

95 

273 
107 
111 

34 
199 
200 
397, 
434 
109 

121 

430 

352 
324, 
430 
107 
111 


Caldicot  V.  Smith,  2  Show.  286        36 
Calne'scase,  Str.  948.    S.  C.  2 


Barn.  235 
Calvin's  case.  Rep.  20, 


54,93,  94 
4,5,  190, 

191 
S.  C. 

239 


Calv  V.  Hardy,  Holt,  407. 

6  Mod.  139,  164 
Cambridge,  L.  H.  S.'s  case,  1  W. 

Blac.  549  80 

Campbell  v.  Maund,  5  A.  &  E. 

876  70, 259 
Campion's  case.     See  R.  v.  Campion 
v.   Skipweth,    1    Sid. 

308  329 

Cannon's  case.  Dyer.  79 

Canterbury  v.  (Archbp.)  House, 

Cow  p.  140  86 
. —  V.  Trinify 

Coll.,  1  Barn.  194  79,  300,  344 
V.  Tubb,3 

Bing.  N.C.989.    S.  C.4Scott, 

543  36 

Cardiffe  Bridge  case,  1  Salk.  146. 

S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  580  120 

Carpenter's  case,  Ray.  4S9        12,  70, 
^  72,  314,  317 


Carter  v.  Crawley,  Ray.  496 
Catchin  v.  VVargar 
Cattern  v.  Barwick,  Stra.  145 
Chapman    v.   Flexman,  2   Vent. 
295 


36 

341 

71 

429 


XVIU 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


Chfstcr's  ca3P  (Arclideacon),  M. 

17,  Car.  1,  Hot- ;U  211 
Chichester's  case,  Lofft.  253  61 
C^PO   v.  liarward, 

1  T.  R.  052  Gl,  220 

Chitty  V.  Dendy,  3A.  &  E.  321      111 
Chrism's  case  277 

Chrislcliurch's  case  (Bornurfh)        165 
Cily    Works'    case,  2    Sid.    112 
68,  71,  73,  75,   78,  151,  172,173, 
174,170,211,212,25:3,2.55 
Clare's  case,  1  Keb.  14  79 

Clarke's  case,  1  Vent.  327.    S.  C. 

Cro.  Jac.  506  53,  198 
V.  Leicestershire  Canal, 

6Q.  B.  898  60,339,351,  401, 

402,  432 
Clarke  v.Sarum  (Ep  ),  Stra.  1082. 

S.  C.  Andr.  20,  185  19,  26,  28, 

61,114,  226,227 
Clerk's  case.     See  Clarke's  case. 

2  Vent.  247  251 

. V.  Lee,  10  Mod.  262  229 

Clitheroe's  case,  Cotnb  239.     S. 

C.  6  Mod.  133     127,  139,  141,  1.50, 

152,  317 

Cock's  case,  2  Sid.  112  75 

V.  Harman,  6  East,  404      161 

Colchester's  case,  1  Roll.  335         5.5, 

00 


(Recorder)  2 


201 


34 

63 

368 
255 


Keb.  656 
Colefat  V.  Newcomb,  Ld.  Ravm. 

1205  29,  63,  144,  145,  229 

Collin's  case,  1  Keb.  549  44 

Colt  V.Coventry  (Ep.),  Elob.  164    309 
Constable's  case,  Cotnb.  285  89 

1  Bulst.  174     89,  90 

Coplestone  v.  Coplestone,  2  Show. 

307 
Corp  V.  Glyn,  3  B.  &  Ad.  801 
Coutanche  v.  Le  Reux,  1   East, 

134 
Coveney's  case,  Dyer,  309 
Coventry's  case,  cited   in  Latch. 

123.     S.  C.  Poph.  176  39,  364 
• (Mayor's)  case,  2  Salk. 

429  1,  333,  344,  315,  422 
(Mayor)    case,    Holt, 

440  345 

Cox's  case,  2  Show.  199  61 

1  P.  Wms.  29  253 

V.    Copping-,  5    Mod.    390. 

S.C.  Ld.  Ravm.  337.     S.  C.  12 

Vin-  Aisr.   Evid.  (F.   b.),  pi.  3 

95  1 47  209 
Crawford  v.  Powell,  Burr.  1013.' 

S.  C.  \V.  Biac.  229        94, 141, 166, 

168,  348,  429,  431 

Crew  V.  Saunders,  Sir.  1005  163 


Cripps   V.  Maidstone  (Mayor),  1 

Keb.  812  38,  39 

Crooke  v.  Watt,  2  Vern.  125  34 

Crosby  v.  Fortescue,  5  D.  2"3         160 

Curser  v.  Sniilli,  1  Barn.  .59,  03     107, 

109,110,221,285 


D. 


Davis's  case,  Stra.  897  211 

Dawson  v.  Fowel,  Hard.  878  71 

Dean  and  Chapter's  case.  Comb. 

133  116 

De  la  Costa  v.  Russia   Company, 

1  Barn.  24.      S.  C.    FitZL^  4. 
S.C.  Stra.  783  ^120,  34.'j 

Devises'  case,  2  Keb  72.5         55,  364 
Dighton's  rase,  1   Vent.  77,  82. 

S.  C.  1  Sid.  46L     S.  C.  1  Lev. 

291.     S.  C.  Raym.  188.     S.C. 

2  Keb.  641,  056     101, 174,  175, 176, 
199,  200,  201,  202,  245,  246,  260, 

262,  263,  264,  347 
Doe  d.  Evans  v.  Jones,  5  M,&.  R. 

755  118 
^—  Hamilton    v.  Clift,  12  A. 

&  E.  575  155 
Le  Keux  v.  Harrison,  6  Q. 

B.  636.  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  77, 

Q.  B.  155 
Thanet(Earl)v.  Gartham, 

1  Bintr,  3.57  20i 
Winder  y.  Lawes,  2N.  & 

P.  195  160 

Dolbin's  case  (Dr.),   1  Keb.  872, 

8-il  12.5,  164.  171,  211 

Dow  V.  Goldinrr,  Cm.  Car.  106        158 
Doyle  V.  Douglas,  4  B.  &  Ad.  554 

295 
Dublin   (Dean)    v.  Dowgatt,  1  P. 

Wms.  438  396,  397 
v.  Dublin  (Arch- 
bishop), Fort.  329  397 
v.  R.,  1  Bro.  P.  C. 

73  397,  399 

Dunch  V.  Norwich  (City),  2  Sulk. 

436  201 

Duncombs'  case,  Sty.  22  277 

Dunkin's  case,  3  Keb.  348.   S.C. 

Trem.  P.  C.  501  33 

V.  Brown,  3  Keb.  3.56  32,  278 

V.  Dunkin,  3  Keb.  344        279 

V.  Mnn,  Ray.  235.    S.  C 

I  Vent.  335.  S.  C.  3  Keb.  348, 

350,  354  35,  277,  278,  279 

Durham's  case  (Mayor),  1  Sid.  33 

168, 192,  261 
E. 

Earl'a  case,  Carth.  173    101,195,199 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


Elen  V.  Forster,  2  P.  Wms.  325    273 

Eldridge  v.  Fletcher,  3  D.  5S8. 
S.  C.  1  H.&  VV.  1U9    105,  106,  111 

Emery  v.  Malmesbury  (Alder- 
men), 3  Q.  B.  559.  S.  C.  3  G. 
&  D.  482  81 

Enfield  V.  Hills,  Sir  T.  Jon.  116. 
S.  C.  2  Lev.  2:^6.  S.  C.  3  Keb. 
859  39, 383,  4U2,  406, 426, 430,  431 

Estwick's  case,  Sty.  43.    S.  C.  2     . 
Roll.  Abr.  456      39,  43,  68,  89,  90, 
99,101,  1.39,313,314,  316 

V.  London  (City),  Siy.  42 

173,  174,  246 

Evelin's  case,  Cro.  Car.  551,  5^59. 
S.  C.Jon.  439.   S.  C.2  Roll. 
Abr.  234  71,  73 

Exeter's  case  (City)  434 

(Dean),  1  Salk.  334—59 

(City),  V.  Glide,  4  Mod.  3:}. 

S.  C.  1  Show.  258,  364.  S.  C. 
1  Comb.  197.  S.  C.  Holt,  169, 
435.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  28,  251, 
S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  223.  See 
Glide's   case   and    R.  v.    Glide 

33,  37,  39,  40,  55,  56 

E.xeter  (Ep.)  v.  Hele,  Show.  P.  C. 
88  353 

Ex  parte  Acworth  (Overseers),  3 
Q.  B.  397  232,  236,  237,  238 

. Barrster,  2  M.  &  R.     46  747 

Barnes,  2D.,  N.  S.  20 

161,  162,  164 

Becke,  3  B.  &  Ad.  704 

13,  14,49 

Best,  3  D.  39  162,  164 

Biackmore,  1  B.  &  Ad. 

123  14,  59,  60 

Boyle,  2  D.  &  R.   13, 

14;  2  D.  &  R.  176,  n.  (a)  106,  107 

■ Brady,  8  D.  232  248 

■ British  Patent  Compa- 
ny, 7  D.  614  13 

Broselv  (Tnhabs.)  7  A. 

&  E.  423.  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P. 
355  218,  236 

Carlton  Hiph  Dale  (In- 

habs.),  4  N.  &.  M.  313.  See  In 
re  Carlton  High  Dale,  and  In 
re  Lodge         90,  91,  242,  285,  286, 

294 

ChifRnch,  6  East,  346  140 

Cirkelt,  3  D.  327  212 

Davies,  5  B.  &  Ad.  1091 

306,  419 

Davy,  2  D.,  N,  S.  24. 

S.  C.  Jur.  24  123 

Deacon,  5  B.  tfe  A.  759 

139 


Ex  parte  Duffield,     6   N.    &   M. 
565.     S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.    617  62,  70, 
73,  2.59,  298,  414 

Farlow,  2  B.  &  Ad.  341     85 

Fielder,  8  D.  .52.5.     S. 

C.  4  Jur.  .507  142 
Fletcher,    see    R.    v. 

London  (Mayor). 
Foundling  Hospital,  5 

D.  722  298 
Grossmith,  10  L.  J.,  N. 

S.  3.59,  Q.  B.  135 
Harnley  (Overseers,)  1 

D.  &,  L.  673  219 

Harvey,  3  N.  &  P.  159     87 

Home,  7  B.  &  C.  632 

280 

Ilutt,  7  D.  690        161,  163, 

164 
Ja^vin  (Inhabs.),  9   D. 

120  235 

King,  7  East,  90       28,  140 

Le  Cren,  2   D.    &  L. 

574.  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  34, 

Q.  B.  173,  204, 317 

Lee,  7  A.  &  E.  139    S. 


C.  2  N.  &  P.  63.  S.  C.  W. 
VV.  &  D.  471.  S.  C.  1  Jur. 
474  88 

Lowe,  4  D.  15  70,  73 

15  L.  J.,  N.  S. 


99,   M.  C.     S.  C.  3  D.  &  L. 
737  47 

Morgan,  2  Chitt.  2.50       23, 

24,109,110,  112,228 

Morrish,  Jac.  Rep.  162, 

128 

Nohro,  1  B.  &  C.  267 

413 
Parkes,  9   D.  614     S. 


C.  1  VVoll.  P.  C.  158      65,  87,  286 

Penruddock,    1    H.    & 

W.  347  63,  72,  298 

Perring  4  A.  &  E.  949. 

S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  477  91,  214 

Phillips,  1  H  &  W.  660 

1.57 

Poe,  2  N.  &  M.  636      228 

Pontefract  (Churchwar- 
dens), 3  G.  &  D.  188.  S.  C. 
3  Q.B.  391  219,  232,  233,  237 

(Inhabs.),    13 

L.  J.,  N.  S.  5,  M.  C.  219 

Pratt,  2  N.  &  P.  102        62 

129,  266 
Reeve,  5  D.  668.  S.  C. 


nom,  R.  V.  Woods,  &c.  (Com- 
mrs.),  VV.  W.  &  D.  364  223 

Reynal,  10  L.  J.,  N.  S. 

304,  Q.  B.  85 


XX 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


Ex  parte  Rickctts,     4    A.   &  E. 

9UU.  S.  C.  G  N.  &  xM.  523  2ft, 
1:30,  216,  265 
Robins,  7   D.  S.  550. 

C.  1  \V.  W.  &.  II.  578  20,  35,  244 
Rugby  Charity,  9  D.  & 

R.  214  6.?,  64 
Sandyp,    1    N.    &   M. 

5yl.     S.  C.  2  B.  &  A(i.  66:}        141 

Scott,  8  D.  328      213,  291, 

324 
Smyth,  4  N.  &  M.  583. 

S.  C.  3  A  &  E.  719.     S.  C.  1 

H.  &  W.  283.     S.  C.  5  N.  &. 

M.  145  23,  109,  110,  111,  112,  22S 
Stanford,   1    G    &    D. 


428.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  8?G.  S.  C. 
J)  D.  927,  110m.  In  re  Regis- 
trar of  Births,  &c.,  at  Brixton     248 

Thaclier,  1   D.  &    R. 

426  ISl,  182 

Thomas,  ]6  L.  J.,  N. 

S.  M.  C.  57.  91 

Thompson,  6  Q.  B.  724 

S.  C.  14  L.  J.  N.  S.  17G,  Q.  B.  294 
'J'urner,  1    W.    W.  & 

418 
Wallingford  Union,  D, 

47 

132 

31 


H.  305 


987 


614 


Whitmarsh,  8  D.  431 
Williams,  4  Jur.  171 
WiniieJd,    3   A.  &   E. 
70,  73,  259,  235,  287,  298 


F. 


Firehild  v.  Gair,  Brown).  201 
Faldo  V.  Ridge,  Yelv.  74.     S.  C. 

Cro.  Jac.  206 
Fall  V.  Reg.,  2  G.  &  D.  804.     S. 

C.  1  Q.   B.  660.     S.  C.  13  L. 

J.,  N.  S.  187,  Q.  B.        383, 

395,  407,  430, 

Faulkner  v.  Elger,6  D.  &  R.  518 

114, 

Foatherstonhaugh  v.  Fenwick,  17 

Ves.  313 
Fenwick  v.  Agar 
Fmch's  case,  Kep.  05 
V.   Ely  (Ep),  8  B.  &  C. 

112.     S.  C.  2  Ai.  &  R.  n.  (a), 

128  161,  162, 

Flarty  v.  Adlum 
Fletcher  v.  Ingram,  1  Salk.  175 
Fliidifir  V.  Lombe,  Gas.  I.  Hard. 

307 
Folkard    V.    Hemel,  2   \V.  Blac. 

lOGl 
Foot  V.  Prowse,  Stra,  099      400, 


116 
829 


392, 

433 

431 

192 

32 

314 


163 
131 

89 

100 

162 
406. 
407 


Ford  V.  Hoskins,  Cro.  Jac.  308  155 
Fortre    v.    Fort  re,    1  Show.  351. 

S.  C.     Salk.  36.     S.   C.  Holt. 

42  33,  34,  277 
Foiilkc's  cafe,  1  Birn.  395  42 
Fnink  v.  Jame5,  5  D.  723  311 
Frederick  v.  Hook,  Corth.  153  :-?6 
Free  (Dr.)  v.  St.  John's  College  421 
Freeman's  case,  Cro.  Car.  579  199 
V.  Phillips,  4  M.  &  S. 

486  431 

Frenche's  case  32 

Frost  V.  Williams,  7  A.  &  E.779  133 
Fuller  V.  Wilson,  3  Q.  B.  64.    S. 

C.  I  G.  &.  D.  286  119 


G. 


Gamhrel  v.  Falmouth  (Earl), ON. 

&  M.  865.  S.  C.  3  A.  &.  617  64 
Garrett   v.  Newcastle  (Mayor)  3 

B.  &  Ad.  252  96 
Ga^-troll  V.  Jones,  2  Roll.  449  42 
Gerveisde  Clifton's  case,  P.  22  E. 

3  214 

Gidley  v.  Palmerston  (Lord),  3B. 

&,  B.  275.  S.C.  7  B.  Moore, 91 

216,  265 
Gile's  case,  Stra.  881  41 

Giilman  v.  Wright,    1  Sid.  410. 

S.  C.  1  Vent,  n  43.44,383 

Glide's    case  (Serjeant),  4   Mod. 

33.    S.  C.  Show.  256,  3G4.     S. 

C.  Comb.  197.  S.  C.  Holt,  169, 
435.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  27,  251.  S. 
C.  Ld.  Raym.  223.  See  Exeter 
(City)  V.  Glide  and  R.  v.  Glide 

202,  203 
Gloucester's    (Ep.)    case,    Comb. 

264  249 
case  (Mayor),  3  Bulst. 

189.  S.  C.  1  Roll.  409  355 

Goddard's  case  (Dr.),  1   Lev,  19. 

S.  C.  1  Sid.  29.    S.  C.   1   Keb. 

75.64  78,79,164,217 

Gold's  case  277 

Goubot  V.  De  Crony,  1  C.  &  M. 

772.     S.  C.  2  D.86.     S.  C.  3 

'i'yrwh.  906  304,  374 

Gray  v.  Tench,  Comb.  454         3-3,  34, 

35,  278,  :<35 

Grays  v.  Cross,  7  Mod.  37  100 

Green  v.  Durham  (Mayor),  Burr. 

127  112,124,125,127,360 
V.  Pope,  Ld.   Raym.   125. 

S.  C.  nnin.  Anon.,  2  Salk.  428. 

S   C.  5  Mod.  316,  S.  C.  Comb. 

400.  S.  C.  Skin.  607  119,  430, 

432,  434 


TABLE    OF     CASES. 


XXI 


Grey  v.  Wil  lough  by,  Moore,  465, 

pi.  657  329,  330 

Grove  v.  Bridj^es  143 


11. 


Haddock's  case,  Raym.  435      35,  196, 

199 
Hall's  case,  1  Mod.  76  171 

Ilarcouil  V.    Fox,  1    Show.  426. 
S.  C.  506,  556.     S.  C.  4  Mod. 
167.     S.  C.  Comb.  209.     S.  C. 
Show.  P.   C.    1.^8.     S.  C.    12 
Mod.  42.     S.  C.  Holt,  188,  189  215 
254,  316,  319,  341 
Harman  v.  Tappenden,   1    East, 
552.     S.  C.  3  Esp.  278      204,  397, 
403,418 
Harris's  case,  Trem.  P.  C.  471       321 

V.  Jay,  4  Rep.  30  («)  153 

Harrison  V.  VVilliams,  4  D.  *&-  R. 

820  85 

Hassell'scise,  Stra.  211  136 

Hastina'scase,  1  Sid.  410.  S.  C.  1 

ModT23  43,  44 

Hawley's  case   (Lord,)   1    Vent. 
145.     S.  C.   2  Keb.  770,  796. 
S.  C.  2  Salk.  430         199,  246,  362 
Hawthornvvaile  v.  Russell,  3  Atk. 

126  33,  278 

Hazard's  case,  2  Roll.  11  201 

Hereford's  case,   1  Sid.  209.      S. 
C.    1   Keb.  660,  665,  716.     S. 
C.  6  Mod.  309.      S.  C.  2  Salk. 
701       42,  194,  337,  348,  349,  350 

357 
Hermitage's  case,  Comb.  210  254 
Heme  v.  Lilborne,  1  Bulst.  150  200 
Hicks  V.  Sherburn,  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 

"  Man."  287  (M)  429 

Hills  V.  Mills,  1  Salk.  36.     S.  C. 
1    Show.    259,  n.    (h).     S.    C. 
Holt,  305.      S.  C.  Comb.  165. 
S.  C.  Skin.  299;  S.C.  12Mod. 
9  278, 279 

Hobson  V.  Parker,  Barnes,  237        163 
Hodges  V.  Atkis,  3  Wils.  398.  S. 

C.  2  VV.  Blac.  877  94,  95 

Hoo-cr  V.  King's  Lynn  (Mayor)       409 

Hofd'en  V. ,  2  Sid.  40  106 

Holland  v.  Franklin,  1  Leon,  184  364 
Hoi  lister  v.  Folly,  1  Bolt.  78  222 

Holroyd  v.  B.>are,  2  B,  &  A.  473   158 
Holt's  case.  Sir  T.Jones,  51.  See 
R.  V.  Holt  246 

Freem.  411         246,  316 

Horsenail's  case  334 

Howard  v.  Wood,  1  Show.  364         55 
Hubbard  v.  Penrice,  Str.  1246  70,  71, 

73 


Hughs  V,  Hughs,  1  Keb.  854         296 
Hughes  V.  Mayre,  3  'I'.  R.  275       161 

V.  Neediiam,  3  Keb.  118  08,  71 

Hunt's  case,  Stra.  42,  93  90 

Hurst's  case,  Raym.  56,  94.  S.  C. 

1  Sid.  94.     S.  C.  1  Lev.  75.    S. 

C.  1  Keb.  3.14.         44,  45,  68,  151, 

152,  173,  191,  211,  247,  253,  254, 

258,  276 

Hutchins  v.  Chambers,  Burr.  -579  224 


L 


He's  case,  1  Vent.  143.     S.  C.  2 
Keb.  807,  820.  S.  C.  Ray.  211. 
S.   C.  2  Lev.  18,  nnm.   R.   v. 
Kinirscleere.  S.  C.  March.  101    73, 
151,"l52,  153,  174,  211,  212,253, 
257,  258,  276 

Illchester's  case,  2  Chitt.  257, 
n.  (a)  55,  56,  298 

Imoev  V.  Pitt,  2  Show.  69  35 

In  re' Aitkin,  4  B.  &  A.  48  161 

—  Aston  Union,  6  A.  &  E.  784      184 

—  Barker,  6  Sim.  476  161 

—  Bailiff  of  Wakefield.  See  R. 
V.  Fox 

—  Baron  de  Bode,  6  D.  789.     S. 

C.  1  VV.  W.  &H.332         29,  113, 

265 

—  Bedford  (J.),  1  Chit.  627  228 

—  Bromley,  3  1).  &  R.  310      46,  305 

—  Carlton  High  Dale,  4  N.  &  M. 
312.  See  Ex  parte  Carlton 
Hinrh  Dale,  and  In  re  Lodge         90 

—  Gateshead  (J.),  6  A.  &,  E.  550, 

n.  19,  240 

—  Granthim,  4  D.  &  L.  427  413 

—  Hand,  4  A.  &  E.  984.     S.  C. 

6  N.&i  M.  520  65 

—  Ilevvard,  2  D.  &   L.  753.     S. 

C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  113,  Q.  B.      216 

—  Ilythe  (Mayor),  5  A.  &  E.  S22. 

S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  239  59 

—  Ivimey.  See  R.  v.  Middlesex 
(Register).  In  re  Jewison. 
See  R.  V.  Fox 

—  King,  7  East,  90.  n.  (a)  47 

—  Lodge,  2  A.  &  E.  123.  S.  C. 
4  N.  &.  M.  312,  nom.  Carlton 
High  Dale  (Inhabs.)  See  In  re 
Carlton  Hio-h  Dale,  and  Ex 
parte  High  Dale       16,  17,  91,  210, 

290 

—  Long,  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  23,  Q. 
B.     S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  144, 

Q.  B.  228,  336,  407,  409 

—  Lowe,  8  East,  238  161 

—  Milncr.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  186, 

M.  C.  1S4 


xxu 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


In  re  Palmer,  9  A.  &.  E.  463.  S.  C. 
1  P.  &  D.  492  &5,  413 

—  Pratt.  7  A.  &  E.  28.  S.  C.  2 

N.  &  P.  102        2-M\  231,  232,  236 

—  Rojjistrar  of  Birtlis,  &c.  at 
Brixton.  See  Ex  parte  Stan- 
ford 

—  Rix,  4  D.  &  R.  852  62,  92 

—  St.  Giles,  &,c.,  1  D.  540  208 

—  Sheffield  Insurance  Comp.  16 

L.  J.,  N.  S.  407,  Q.  B.  82 

—  Smith,  4  A.  &  E.  286.     S.  C. 

5  N.  &  M.  589  265 

—  Taylor,  5  B.  &  A.  538  2.j6 

—  Tithe  Commisoioner.-,  1  D.,  N. 

S.  810  261 

—  Walsall,  1  II.  &  W.  370    163,  301, 

344 


J. 


Jaqnes  v.  Cesar,  2  Wms.  Saund. 

101  397 

Jenning's  case,  5  Mod.  423,  n.  (a). 

S.  C.  5  Mod.  521  77,  273,  358 

Jone's  case,  2  Jones,  177,  178  357 
Jones  V.  Ashburner,  4  East.  465       97 

V.  Llandaff  (Ep.),  4  Mod.  27  249 

Jotham  V.  Marriott,  2  D.  343.    S. 

C.  3C.  &M.  183  302 

Justice  V.  Jones,  1  Barn.  280,  291. 

S.  C.  Stra.  657.     S.  C.  nom.  R. 

V.  Bettesvvorth,  id.  293  278,  279, 
298,  344 
K. 

Kenn's  case,  7  Rep.  44  79,  213 

Kennetl  v.  Avon  Canal,  7  T.  R. 

451  413, 414 

Kid  V.  Watkinson  (Dr.),  11  Mod. 

221  212 

Kinaston  v.  Shrewsbnrar  (Mayor), 

Cas.  t.  Hard.  379.     S.  C.  Stra. 

1051.  S.  C.  7  Bro.  P.  C.  376  68, 
38M,  392,  397 
King's  (Dr.)  case,  1  Keb.  517,  521  71 
Knipe  v.  Edwin,  4  Mod.  231.     S. 

C.  Comb.  244  4,  172,  276 


L. 


Lambert's  case,  Carth.  170.     S. 

C.  12  Mod.  3.      S.  C.  nom.  R. 

V.  IIill,  1  Show.  253  178,  249,  250, 
348,  350,  351 
Langham's  case,  March.  283,  pi. 

237  194 

Lawrence  v.  Hooker,  5Bing.  6  17 
Lecturer  of  St.  Anne's  case.    See 

R.  V.  Loudon  (Ep  ) 


Lee's  (Dr.),  or  Warner's  case,  2 

Keb.  693  257 

Lee  V.  Drnko,  2  Salk.  468  211 

V.  Milner,  2  M.  &  W.  824       31 

V.  Oxonden   (Dr.),  3   Salk. 

229.    S.  C.  Skin.  290  22,  229 

Leigh's  case,  3  Mod.  334,    S.  C. 

nom.  R.  V.  Lee,  1  Show.  2.52. 

S.  C.  Carth.  169.    S.  C.  3  Lev. 

309.     See  R.  v.  Oxendon      29,  43, 

44,  68,  7.5,  170,  171,  178,  211,  227, 
229,  249,  250,  272,  274,  303 
Levy  V.  Cole,  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  295, 

Q.  B.  295 

Lewis's  case  (Dr.)  78 

Lidleston     v.     Exeter    (Mayor), 

Comb.  422,  478.  S.  C.  Fol.  19. 

S.  C.  12  Mod.  126.     S.  C.  Ld. 

Raym.  223  20,  296,  364 
Linley  Chapel  (Inhabs.)  v.  Ches- 
ter (Ep.)  429 
London  (City)  v.  Estwick,  Sty.  32  352, 
358,  364,  365,  366,  368 
V.  Swallow,  2  Keb. 

50,  76  169,  295,  326 

Londonderry's  (Ld.)   case,  Stra. 

857.    S.  C.  1  Barn.  280  33,  34 

Lord  V.  Francis,  Holt,  170.    S.  C. 

nom.  Anon.  12  Mod.  410,  which 

see  431 

Love  V.  Dr.  Bentley,  11  Mod.  134  70, 
95,  134,  209 
Lovegrove  v.  Bethel,  1  W.  Blac. 

663  33,  35,  278 

Lucas  V.  Colchester  (Mayor)  350 

Lum ley's  case  39 

Luskins  V.  Carver,  Sty.  7    33,  34,  3.5, 

105,  277,  278 

M. 

Machell   v.   Nevinsoa,   11    East, 

84,  n.  200 

Manaton's  case,  Ravm.  365  165,  188, 
203,  350,  354,  357.  364,  365 
Marshall  v.  Nightingale,  2  B.   & 

C.  313.  S.  C.  3  D.  &  R.  549  430 
Martin   v.  Jenkins,  7  Mod.  36-5. 

S.  C.  Stra.  1145  141,166,431 
Martyn  v.  Hind,  1  Doug.  144,  519  55 
Mason  v.  Day,  Gilb.  Eq.  Cas.  156 
v.  Keeling,  Lord  Raym. 

608  171 

Matthew  v.  Cary,  Carth.  74  133 

Maw  V.  Harding,  2  Vern.  233  36 

May  V.  Gwynne,  4  B.  &  A.  301  147 
Meddlicott'scase  2,90,364 

Merrit's  case  (Dr.),  2  Show.  178. 

See  R.  V.  Physicians'  College       99 

Middleton's  case.  Dyer.  332  b     2,  39, 

74,  101,  172,  296,  316,  333,  437 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


XXIU 


Middleton's  case,  1  Sid.  169.    S. 
C.  1  Keb.  625,  6:29.    S.  C.  1 
Lev.  128,  nnm.  11.  v.  New  Wa- 
terworks (Govr.)         Hi),  75,  79,  68, 
151,  152,  170,  171,  17H,   174,  211, 
212,  217,  253,  254,  255,  263,  303 

Mill's  case,  Kay.  152.  S.  C.  1 
Lev.  162  130 

Milward  V.  Thatcher,  2  T.  R.  81  263, 

401 

Bloneyer's  case,  1  Sid.  304.  S.  C. 
nom.  R.  V.  ytarlino-,  2  Keb.  91    329 

Moore  v.  Hastings  (Mayor),  Cas. 
t.  Hard.  353  127,  338 

Mor<ian  v.  Cardij^nn  (Archdea- 
co'n),  1  yalk.  166.  S.  C.  Ld. 
Raym.  138  ^  70,  71 

Morgan  v.  Carmarthen,  3  Keb. 
350  364 

Morley  v.  Stacker,  6  Mod.  83  90 

Morris's  case  56,  202 

Musgrave  v.  Parry,  Vern.  710        146 


N. 


Neale  v.  Bowles,  1  H.  &  W.  584  406 
Needham's  case,  Trem.  469  321 

JMi'J'hting-ale  v.  Marsham,  3  D.  & 

R.  54:9  257 

Norfolk's  case  264 

Northampton's  case,  Carlh.  118        70 

: Comb.  102  94 

Lofit.  549        174, 

191,  254 
Norwich  (Mayor's)  case,  12  Mod. 

322  430 

Nottingham's  case.  Comb.  483         221 

-^ (Sherift^)  case  258 

. (Town)   case,  Bull. 

N.  P.  290 
(Town  Clerk's)  case, 

1  Sid.  31  50,  52,  94,  264 


O. 


Offley  v.  Best,  Keb.  243.    S.  C.  1 

Sid.  372.    .C       Lev.  187     32,33, 
34,  35,  105,  277,  279 
Olive  v.  Ingram,  7  Mod.  267.     S. 

C.  Stra.  1114  257,258 

Orme  v.  Pemberton,  Cro.  Car.  5S9  212 
Owen  V.  Saunders,  Ld.  Ray.  158, 

161.     See   Saunders  v.   Owen 

215,  276 
(Dr.)  V.  Stainhovv       r.).  Sir 

T.  Jon.  199.  S.  C.  k  (D45.  S. 

C.  2  Show.  200,  n.  {a)        178,  226, 

227 
Oxford's  (Town  Clerk)  case,  Comb. 

241  19, 262 


P. 


Painter    v.    The    Liverpool    Gas 

Company,  3  A.  &,  E.  433  201 

Papilion's  case,  Skin.  64        2-58,  290 
292,  317 
Parish  Clerk's  case,  13  Rep.  70 

211 

Loffi.  434         211 

212 


Issue's   case,   Comb.  257 

210,  253 
Parker's  case,  1  Vent.  331        45, 191 , 

198 

V.  Clerk,  6  xMod.  253        211, 

212 
Parkin.son's  case.  Comb.   143.  S. 
C.  Holt,  143.    S.  C.  Carth.  92. 
S.  C.  1   Show.  74,  and  74  n. 
(6),  (f).  S.  C.  3  Mod.   265        79, 
254,  268, 272,  273,  274,  303 
Parrott's  case.  See  R.  v.  Newcas- 
tle (Mayor). 
Patrick's    case  (Dr.),  1   Lev.   65. 
S.  C.  Raym.  101.    S.  C.  1  Sid- 
346.    S.  C.  1    Keb.  289,  610. 
S.  C.  2  Keb.  65,  166,  168,  171 

4,  15,  29,  30,  33,  41,  42,  64,  67,  69, 
70,  73,  77,  79,  80,69,  116,  167,  174, 
175,  192,  211,  212,  213,  220,251, 
253,  254,  255,  262,  267,  268,  269, 
272,  277,  278,  296,  313,  315,  317, 
333,  341,  347,  351,  353,  367,  397, 

402,  403 
Peat's  case,  6  Mod.  229.    S.  C.  2 
Salk.  572.  See  K.  v.  Peach         10, 
118,  119,  221,235,320,321 
Pees  v.  Leeds  (Mayor),  Stra.  640 

75,  315,  316,  397 
Pepis's  case,  1  Vent.  342       175,  246, 

247 
Peterborough's  case,  1  Sid.  377 

221 
Pett  v.  Pett,  1  Com.  89.  S.  C. 
Ld.  Raym.  571.  S.  C.  Holt, 
259,  J.  C.  1  Salk.  250.  S.  C. 
3  Salk.  138.  S.  C.  12  Mod. 
409.  S.  C.  1  P.  Wms.  25        32,  3.5, 

36 
Philip's  case,  2  Roll.  82,  85  225 

Philips  V.  Bury,  Ld.  Raym.  5.  S. 
C.  2  T.  R.  346.  S.  C.  Skin. 
447, 475.  S.  C.  Show.  P.  C.  35. 

5.  C.  1  Sid.  71.  S.  C.  1  Show. 
366.  S.  C.  2  Show.  170.  S.  C. 
2  Keb.  799,  861.  S.  C.  4  Mod. 
112        10,61,  74,78,79.  111,191, 

227,  267,  273,  274,  275,  429 
Pierce  v.  Perks,  1  Sid,  281        33, 34, 

35,  279 


XXIV 


TABLE    OF   CASES. 


Piper  V.  Dennis,  12  Mod.  253 
Polhil  V.  Blany,  2  Keb.  753 
Poliice's  case,  2  Barn.  365 
Porphyry  v.  Legingham,  2  Keb. 

344 
Powell  V.  KoIburn,3VVils.  3.55 
V.  Milbiuik,  1  T.  R.  399. 

See  Bowel!  v.  Milbank 
V.    Price,   Comb.    41 


3G4, 

Powib'  case  (Ld.),  Dyer,  170  a 
Price  V.  Parker,  1  Lev.  158 
Prohurst's  ca.«e,  Carlh.  16S       76, 
Protector    (The)     v.    Colchester 
(City)  Sty.  447,  453        201, 
246, 

V.  Craford,  Sty. 

457       15,  6S,  73,  78,  139,  151, 

173,  174,  176,  212,  246,  254, 

260,  262,  263, 

V.   King-ston-up 


on-Thames,  Siy.  477  11.5,  127, 
-V.  Philips,  Hardr. 


431 

71 

255 

153 
26 

226 
342, 
367 
1 
279 
268 

203. 
247 

152, 
255, 
271 

353 

259 

35G 


311,  326 

Pullen  V.  Palmer,  Ld.  Raym.  496 

199, 

Puse  V.  Clapham.  See  R.  v.  Blel- 

show. 


R. 


Raine's  case,  5  Mod.  54.  S.  C.  Ld. 

Raym.  262.  See  R.  v.  Raines       23, 
33,35 
Rakestraw  v.  Brewer,  2  P.  Wms. 

510  139 

Ravenliill's  case,  Stra.  608  41 

Rawlinsou  v.  Shaw,  3  T.  R.  558     193 
Raysing's  case.  Dyer,  209  1 

Ree  d.  Conolly  v.  Vernon,  5  East, 

51  154 

R.  V. (J.)  1  Chitt.  164         133. 

230,  237 
Abingdon  (Mayor)  Holt,  44  L 

S.  C.  12Mod.30».  S.  C.  Carth. 

501,  n.    S.  C.  2  Salk.  431,699. 

S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  5.59.         16.),  168. 

398,  313,  314,  31.5,  316,  319,32-5, 

338,  341,  342,  344,  346,  351,  3.53, 

357,  359,  364,  365,  366,  367,  368, 
380,  433,  434 

Adams,  2  A.  &  E.  409  271 

Agardsley  (Manor),  5  D.  19 

21, 156,  157,  158 
Allen,  3  N.  &  M.  154.     S. 

C.  5  B.  &  Ad.  9>i4  137 

Allgood,  7  T.  R.  746      162,  163 

AUsop,  2  Show.  170,   177. 

S.  C.  2  Jon.  175,  194.     S.  C. 


Carth.  169.  S.  C.  Comb.  143       77, 

78,  79,  217,  271,  272,  273,  274,  275 

R.  V.  Aldborough (Bailiffs),  1  Keb. 

308.    S.  C.  10  Mod.  100        55,  56, 

201,203,251,348 

All  Souls'  Coil.  Sir  T.  Jon. 

175  77, 268 

.Amicable    Assurance,    Str. 

696  82 
Andover    (Burgesses),    Ld. 

Raym.  710  117,  199 
Andover   (Mayor),  3    Salk. 

229  39 

Andover  (Town),    12   Mod. 

332.    S.  C.  2  Salk.  433.    S.  C. 
Holt,  411  324,  337,  430 

Anglesea  (J.)  1  D.  &  L.  170. 

S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  131,  M. 

C.  213, 219 

Antrobus,  2  A.  &  E.  988         94 

Appeal  Commissioners,  3  M. 

6  S.  132  122 
Appleford,  2  Keb.  862,  864, 

S.  C.  1   Mod.  82,  nom.  Apple- 
furd's  case,  which  see.      69,  77,  78, 
109,  2.57,  258,  269 

Argent,  2  T.  R.  181.    S.  C. 

Burr.  1783  192,  212 

Armstrong,  Andr.  109  369 

Arnald,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.,.50, 

Q.B.  64,259,378 

Arnold,  4  A.  &  E.  657.     S. 

C.  6  N.  &  M.  152        58,  100,  167, 
209,  298 

Ashlon,  Say,  159  211,  212 

Athay,  Burr.  653  41 

Atlwood,  4  B.  &  Ad.  4S1        26, 

37,  169,  182, 183,  290 

A.xbridge,    Cowp.   523  190, 

192,  201,  263,  264,  401 

Babb,  3  T.  R.  579  95 

Bigshdw,  7  T.  R.  363  85 

Baiiy  (The)  1  Keb.  33    38,  203, 

341,  342,  343 

Baines,  6  Mod.  193.     S.  C. 

Ld.  Raym.  126.5,  1267  21.5,  229 
Biker,  2  N.  &.  P. 375.  S.  C. 

7  A.  &  E  502  170,411 

Baldwin,  7  T.  R.  169  135 

3  P.  &  D.  124.    S. 

C.  8  A.  ^  E.  947.    S.  C.  1  VV. 
W.  &  H.  681       135,  392,  401,  406. 
407,  408 

Banoror   (Overseers),  16   L. 

J.,  N.  S.,  58,  M.  C.         16,  210,  338 

Banks,  Burr.  1454.    S.  C.  1 

W.  Bl.  451,  452        27,  149,  150, 

16.5,  166,  167,  168,  180,  181,  182, 

183,  246,  299,  300,  301,  306,403, 

412,  416,  442 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


XXV 


R.V.  ranker,  1  W.  Blac.  300, 
352.  S.  C.  Burr.  1265.  S.  C. 
Andr.  24,  180  2,  4,  5,  12,  18,  19, 
34,  35.  39,41,  43,  63.  80,  113,  114, 
118,  143,  14.5,  173,  174,  176,  IHl, 
184,  211,  213,  246,  2.53,  254,  257, 
28.5,  287,  294,  305,  367,  413 

Barker,  6  A.  &  E.  391      51,  241 

Barlow,  2  Salk.  609  206 

Barnard,  2  Keb.  402  256 

Barnard's  Inn,  5  A.  &  E.  24 

28,  44,  138,  151 

Barnstable  (Inhabs.),  1  Barn. 

137  220, 221 

. Fol.  36     220 

Barnwell,  11  Mod.  206.     S. 

C.  Park,  74  220 

Barton,  Say,  146  433 

Baskerville,  Bac.    Abr.  tit. 

"  Manr  (H.)  42-2 

Batemin,  4  B.  &.  Ad.  .553. 

S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  718    15,  250,  301, 
413,414 

Bath  (Ep.)  1  D.  &  M.  193. 

S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  147.    S.  C.  12  L. 

J.,  N.  S.  324,  Q.  B.  f)3 

Bath  (Mayor)  6  Mod.  152      367,  i 

424,  430 

Bath  (R.)  9  A.  &  E.  874.  S. 

C.  1  P.  &  D.  622  28,  51,  219 

Bathurst,  1  \V.  Blac.  209        145 

Baylay,  1  B.  &  Ad.  761  226 

. Bear,  2  Salk.  417  199 

Beard,  12  East,  672  239 

Beaufort  (Duke),  5  B.  &  Ad. 

442.    S.  C.  2  N.  &  M.  815  55 

Bedford  Corporation,  1  East, 

79  315 

Bedford  Level  Corporation, 

1  East,  79  165,  166,  167,  16S, 

181,  182,  299 

6  East,  367.     S. 

C.  2  Smith,  535         19,  26,  27,  49, 
180,  181,  1S2,  183,  245,  240,  305, 

412 

Bedford  (Mayor)  267 

Bedfordih.  (J.)  Cald.  157        205 

Bedfoidsh.  (J.).  9  L.  J.,  N. 

S.  3  M.  C.  233 

11  A.  &  E. 

134  232,  236 

3  P.  iSi  D. 

21  91,  137 

Beecher,  8  Mod.  335    221, 

335 

B^edle.  3  A.  &E.  467      26,27, 

81,  96,  100,  143,  181,  182,  304 

Benn,  6  T.  R.  198  224 

Benlley.      See    "  Bentley's 

case." 


R.  V.  Best,   16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  102, 
M.  C.  134 

Beston,  3  T.  R.  594        91,  96, 

169,  206 

Bettesworth  (Dr.),   7   Mod. 

218.  S.  C.Sira.  857,956,1111, 
S.  C.  And.  365.  S.  C.  1  Barn. 
291,  298,  331,  424.  S.  C.  2 
Barn.  234,  420.  S.  C.  2  Keb. 
139.  S.  C.  Fitz.  12.5.  S.  C.  VV. 
Kel.  1.56.  See  Justice  v.  Jones 
33,  34,  35,  110,  2b7,  278,  279,  320, 
335,  345,  349 

Beverley  (Mayor),  8  D.  140 

94,  95,  283 

Bilton  (R.),  14  L.  J.,  N.  S. 

33,M.  C.  01 

Bin<rham,  4  Q.  B.  887     85,  417, 

420 

Birmingham    Canal,   2  W. 

Blac.    70S  4, 18,  32,  243,  266 

4  Jur.  318      85 


(Rector),  7  A. 


&  E.  259,260  19,  69,  99,  100,  118, 
182,  188,2.57,270,304 
Railway.  1  G.  & 


D.  335.  S.  C.  2  Q,.  B.  47.  S.  C. 
2  Kail.  Ca?.  694.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B. 
528,  and  3  G.  &  D.  in  error  1-5,  131, 
243,  244,  301,  359,  375 

Bishop's  Stoke  (Manor),  8  D. 

608  159, 303 

Blackwall  Railway,  9  D.  558  16, 

17,  293 

Blackwarton  (Inhabs.)  10  B. 

&C  792  103 

Bland  (Dr.),  7    Mod.     356. 

S.  C.  Bull.  N.  P.  200     80,  114,211 
226,  249,  253,  2-57,  207,  273,  303 

Bletshow,  1  Butt.  300.  S.  C, 

nom.  Puse  v.  Clapham,  1  VVils. 
305  74,  209,  2'.  3 

Blooer,  Burr.  1043         12, 18, 20, 

63,  113,  114,  173,  174,  191,  212, 
213,246,258,412 

Blyth,  5   Mod.   404        77,   7_8, 

273 

Bond,  6  A.  &  E.  905         28,  51, 

145 

Bonsai  (Manor),  3  B.  &  C. 

173.     S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  825  1.55,157 
Bossiney.        See  Bossiney's 

1  O"*- 

case.  loi 

Bosworth,  Stra.  1113  2,  125,126 

Bouphey,  1   B.    &.  C.  505. 

S.  C.   2  D.  &  R.  824.      115,  159, 

IGU 

Boiilton,  3  Keb.  404  52 

Bower,  1  B.  «Si  C.  585.  S.  C. 

2  D.  &  R.  642  101,  169,  355 


XXVI 


TABLE     OP     CASES. 


R.  V.  Craintroe  Union,  4  P.  &,  D. 
59;J.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  1:H)  03 

Branc;ister(Chiirch\vMr(lons), 

2  N.  &.  P.  5S().      S.  C.  7  A.  & 
E.  458   08,  349,  351,  300,  3S5,  380, 

423 

Bray  field,  2  Keb.  488        39,  40, 

200,  203 

Brecknock  Canal,  3  A.  &  K. 

221.     S.  C.  4  L.  J.,  N.  S.  100, 
Q.  B.       S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  817. 
S.  C.  1  II.  &.  \V.  279    87,  244,293, 
284,  285 

Brewers'  Com.,  4  D.  &  R. 

492.  S.  C,  3  B.  &  C.  172.  S.  C. 
5  M.  &  R.  140     15.5,  150,  L57,  159, 
100,  288,  302,  380 

Bridgcnorth.      See    R.     v. 

Bridgnorth 

Bridwowater(Corp.),  3Doug'. 

379      165,  160,  167,  168,  131,  234 
299,  315 

(Inhabs  ),  10  A.  & 

E.  694  218 

—  (Mayor),  2   Chitt. 


257 


&  D.  129 


(Mayor),  W.  W. 
1  N.  &  P. 


47 


466.    S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  339    28,  87, 
88,  141 

—  Bridgman,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S. 

44,  M.  C.  47 

—  Bridofnorfb  (Biilifls),  1  Barn. 

53.     S.^C.  Stra.  808  62,  424 

—  Bridgenorth(  Mayor),  2  Chit. 
256  37,  38,  54,  180, 186,  188 

2  P.  &   D. 

317.     S.  C.  10  A.  &  E.  66    57  299, 

419 

Bri"-hton  (Churchwardens), 

1  N.  &  P.  775.     S.  C.  6  A.  & 

E.  794,  793,  n.  68,  209 

—  Bristol  Dock,  12  East,  429 

18,  28,  85 
6  B.  &  C.  181. 


S.  C.  9  D.  &  R.  309    60,  117,  120, 
309,  322,  327,  333,  353,  357,  380, 

402 
2  Q.  B.  64.     S. 


C.  1  G.  &  D.  286.  S.C.2Rail. 
Cas.  599      19,  25,  30,  60,  119,  132, 
351,  352,  353,  379 

(Mayor)    1  JShow. 

288.     S.  C.  Comb.  145.     S.  C. 
nom.  R.  V.  Rowe,  Carth.  199     198, 
261,  288,  358,  369,  371 
1  D.  &  R.  389. 


R.  V.  Bristol    CRailway),  12  L.J. 

N.  S.  100,  Q.  B.   S.  C.  3  G.  &, 

D.  384.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  102  131,244, 
283,  284, 285,  286,  287 

7  J  Li  r.  233     4 1 4 

Bristow,  6  T.  R.  103. 170  11,  25. 

103,  104,  100,  177,  530,  294,  375 
Broderip,  5  B.  &  C.  240.  S. 

C.  7  D.  &  R.  861  91,  240 
Buckingham  (Corp.),  10  Mod. 

175  3,4,  53,  57,  124,  191,  194,  198 
204,  349,  358 
1  N.    &    P. 

503  67 
Biickinghamsh.  (J.),  2  M.  & 

S.  230  133,  134 
—  3  East, 

342  218 


2   D.  &  R. 


689.  S.  C.  1  B.  &  C.  485   132, 135, 
224,  240,  241,  288 

7  B.  &  C.  3  103 

3  N.  &  M. 


69.     S  .  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Morgan, 

2  A.  &  E.  618,  n.  (a)  119,224,240, 

241 
2  G.  &,  D. 

560  238 

R.  V.  Buller,  8  East,  388  94,  288,  299 

Bumstead,  2  B.  &  Ad.  705    123, 

204,  290 

Bury  Roads,  6  D.  &  R.  368    134 

Bnshfield,  2  Sess.  Ca.  67        214 

Cadoffan   (Ld.),    1  D.  &  R. 

559.  S.  C.  5  B.  &  A.  902  163 

Cambridge  (J.),  8  D.  89   74,  206 

4  N.  &  M. 

238.  S.  C.  2  A.  &  E.379  222,231, 
418,  419 
(Mayor),  Burr.  2003 

105,  166,  181,  182,  246,  301,  315, 
317,384 

2  Chitt.  144     125 

2  T.  R.  456 


100,  353,  360,  361,  362,  372,  373, 
374,  370,  334 
4  P.  &  D. 


295.  S.  C.  12  A.  &  E.  1(  2.  S. 
C.  10,  L.  J.,  N.  S.  25,  Q.  B.  87,  68, 

401 
•4Q.B.801. 


S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  82  Q.  B. 

33,  51,  93,  330,  418 
■(U.),  8  Mod.  143, 


S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Griffiths,  5  B. 

&  A.  713  53,  401,  402 


150,  164.  S.  C.  8tra.  557.  S. 
C.  Fort.  202.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym. 
1331.  S.  C.  Andr.  176.  2,21, 
117,113,  193,  197,  198,  199, 
201,  202,  203,  267,  263,  300, 

353,  402 


TABLE    OP     CASES. 


XXVU 


R  V  Cambridge,  (Mayor,)  2  Show. 

69  175,  176,  200 

Burr.  1G51. 

S.  C.  1  W.  Rlac.  547  1,  4,  18, 

19.  80,  108,  114,  117, 151, 172, 170, 
245,  267,  268,  272,  296,  300,  313, 
316,  317 

6  T.  R.  89,  99, 100 

53,  106,  112,  193,268,269 

Cambridgesh.  (J.,)  I  P.  &  D. 

249.     S.  C.7A.  &  E.480.     S. 

C.  9  A.  &  E.  338  47 

. 1  D.  &  R.  325 

134,  231,  291 

Campion,  1  Sid.  14,  15.     S. 

C.  nnm.  Campion's  case,  2  Sid. 
97         175.  196,  203,  262,  263, 

264,  401 

Canterbury  (Archbp.,)  7  Mod. 

220  77,  293 

■  8  East, 


219     18,  28,  36,  42,  44,  45,  59,  68, 
108,  178,  212,  229,  253,  257,  267, 
294 
15  East, 


199 


117,135,159  10,14,15,41,49, 
114,  143,  145,  254,  266,  274,  276, 
295,  297,  415,  417 

(City,)   1    Lev. 

39,  117,  125 

(Guardians,)    1 

W.  Blac.  667.    S.  C.  Burr.  2290 

220,  221 

(Mayor)  62 

Stra. 

175 


R.  V.  Cnrmarlhen  (Mayor,)  11  A. 

&  E.  13  87 
(R.),  7  A.  & 

E.  756  51,  232 
Camarthensh.  (J.),  4  B.  &, 

Ad.  563  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  368  218 
16  L.  J.,  N. 

S.,  M.  C.  167  92,  93 
Carnarvonsh.   (J.),  4  B.  & 

A.  66  230,231,235,236 

1 G.  &  D. 


674 


11  Mod. 


493.     S.  C.  Stra.  674  247 
Canton  (Overseers,)  1  Barn. 

299  117, 220 

Capel,  10  A.  &  E.  403  121 

Carlisle  (Mayor,)  11  Mod. 

378.     S.  C.  8  Mod.  19,  99.    S. 

C.  Fort.  200,  201,  204.     S.  C. 

Stra.  385.     S.  C.    Ld.   Raym. 

415,  12S3.     S.  C.  Fitzof.   190 

56,  74,  196,  197,  198,  200,  246 
2  Burn's  Ecc.  Law, 

113  143 

Carlyle,  2  B.  &.  Ad.  971         238 

Carmarthen  (Corp.,)  4  Jur. 

365  299 
(Mayor,)    Say, 

211  181,300 
1   M.  &, 


423.    S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  325.   S.  C 

11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  3  M.  C.      219,231, 

233,  237 

Carpenter,  6  A.  &  E.  794.  S. 

C.  1  N.  &  P.  775         68,  170,  210, 
305,  309 

Carrocke,  1  Bott,  P.  L.  299 

74,  206 

Carter,  4  T.  R.  246        207,  293 

Ciirtworth  (Inhabs.)  1  D.  & 

L.  844  232,  235 

Chalice,  Ld.  Raym.  848        364, 

431 
Chalk,  Comb.  396  55 

Ld.  Raym.  225.     S. 

C.   Salk.  428.      S.  C.  5  Mod. 
254,  257  40,  197,  198,  203 

Chapman,  6  Mod.  152.     S. 

C.  Holt,  443        262,  330,  331 ,  342, 
357,  368,  430,  432,  443,  444 

Cheadle    Savings'   Bank,    3 

N.  &M.  418,  n.  (a).  S.  CIA. 
&  E.  323,  n.  {a). 

Clieek,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  65,  M. 

C.  224,  343 
Cheltenham  Commrs.  1  Q. 

B.  471  62,  232 
4  Jur. 

1060  32 

Chesh.  (J.,)  5  B.  &  Ad.  439  232 

2  N.  &  M.  827 

142 
9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  89, 

M.  C.  233 
1  P.  &  D.  88.  S. 

C.  8  A.  &  E.  398  218,  237 
3  P.  &  D.  23,  n. 

(a)  41,  91 

15  L.  J.,  N.  S. 


S.  696 


54,  106,  204,  354 
3  P.  &  D. 


35. 
Q.  B. 


S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  25 


85 


114,  M.C.    S.  C.4D.  &L.94 

47,  234 

15  L.  J.,  N.  S. 

124,  M.  C.  291 

8  D.  616  218 

11  A.  &  E.  139   232 

I  D.,  N.  S.  570    219 


—  Cheshunt  Roads,  5  B.  &  Ad. 
438  136, 412 


XXVlll 


TABLE    OF     CASES. 


R.  V.  Chester  (Archdeacon)  1  A. 

&  E.  y42.         «.  C.  3  N.  &  M. 

413  70 
(Ep.)  Com.  Dig.  lit. 

Man.  B.  304 
1  W.  Bine. 22. 

S.  C.  IVVils.  20G        10,  11,21,31, 

78,  114,  178,  22G,  227,  273,  274, 

275 
1  W.  Blac.  25. 

n.  (o)  28,114,186,193 

Stra.  797.     S. 


C.  1  Barn.  52     63,  70,  79,  272,  273, 

274 
1  T.  R.  396 


4,  11,  18,  19,  20,  25,  26.  28,  49,  6.5, 
113,  114,  144,  182,  217,  249,  288, 

416,  417 
(Citizens)  1  M.  & 

5.  101  109 
(Mayor)     Comb. 

307,309.    S.  C.  5  Mod.  10.    S. 
C.  3  Salk.230.  S.  C.  Holt,  438,  70, 
73,   99,   101,    102,    194,    299,  324 
336,  337,  348.  349,  350,   356,  380 
1  M.  &  S. 


102  26,  99,  101,  182, 183 
Chichester,  (Mayor,)  1  Show. 

273  101,  368 
Christchurch     (Boroujjh,) 

Bull.  N.  P.  2(10  468,  325 
Clapham,  1  Lev.  306,     S.  C. 

Fitzg.  194,  248.     S.  C.  2  Keb. 

738.     S.  C.  1  Vent.  110,  num. 

R.  V.  Marches  (President.)  See 

R.  V.  Win,  164,  306,  319,  322, 

346,  353,  354,  355 

Clapham,  1  Wils.  305       74,  94 

223  294 

Clark,  2  East,  78,  82  'l68, 

138,  335,  397,  403, 
432,  434 
13  L.  J  ,  N.  S.  91,  M. 

C.  133 
1  D.  &  M.  690.  S.  C. 

5  Q.  B.  887  19,  98 
Clear,  7  D.  &  R.  393  S.  C. 

4B.  &C.899  4,5,16,18,28, 

74,  83,  84,  223,  285,  268,  294,  414 
Clerkenwell  Parish, Bull.  N. 

P.  200  290,  300,  305,  306 
(Churchwardens,) 

3N.  &M.  411  129 
Parish,  1  A.  & 

E.  317  270 
Clithero  (Mayor)  1  W.  Blac. 

61  38 
(Town,)   6   Mod. 

133  46,  334,  341,  342 
Cockermoulh  Inclosure,  1  B. 


&  Ad.  .380  87,137,138,291 

—  Codd,  1  P.  &.  D.  456.    S.  C. 

9  A.  &  E.  682  48,  241 

Coggan,  6  East,  431      154,  155, 

1.56,  158 
Colchester  (.T.,)  5  B.   &  A. 

355.  S.  C.  1  I).  &-  K.  146  207 
■  (Mayor,)  Comb. 

324  364 
4  Doug. 

14  181 
2  T.  R. 


259         18,  26,  27,  100,  166,   180, 
181,  182,  183,  245,  246, 
304,  442 
6  East, 

360  245 
(Town,)  2  Keh. 

188  44,314 

Colebrooke,  2  Ld.  Ken.  163 

148 
Coleridge,  1  Chitt.  592.     S. 

C.  2B.  &A.  806        16,18,22,28, 
59,  64,  6.5,  97,  108 

Collett,  2  B.  &  C.  341  227 

Cunyers,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  301, 

Q  B.  106,110,124,329, 

378 
Conyngham,  1  D.  &  R.  .529. 

S.  C.  5B.  &  A.  885  23,111 

Cookson,  16  East,  376  123 

Cooper,  1  Keb.  777  39,  203 

Coopers'  Company,  7  T.  R. 

543  125.320.321,353,354 

Corbett,  Say.  267  433 

Cornwall   (Corp.,)  11   Mod. 

174,  n.(6)  72,  187,  189, 194 
(J.,)  5  A.  &  E.  134. 

S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  144.     S.  C.  2 

H.  &  \V.  157  218,  233 

6  A.  &  E.  894  218 

5  Q.  B.  9,  n. 


(a) 
—  Corv,  3  Keb.  855. 

Lev.  222 

Holt.  4.39 

3  Salk.  230-6 


S. 


238 
C.  2 

255 
413 

239,  292 


Corye,  Sty.  87        199,  246,  333 

Coventry  (Mayor,)   2  Salk. 

4.30.    S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  391.    S. 

C.  Holt,  433  101,  115,  175,  .345, 
355,  362 
3  Doug. 

236  125,  126,  186,  188,  394,  298 
4  D.  &  R. 

330.  S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  764    362 

Cowle,  Burr.  855  4 

Croyden  (Churchwardens,)  5 

T.  R.  713  174,  175, 176,  271,  288, 
226,  314 


TABLE   OF   CASES. 


XS.X 


R.  V.  Cumberland  (J.),  1  M.  &  S. 

192,  196,         30,  32,  142,  230,  231, 
232,  275,  276,  289,  305 
4  A.  &  E. 

697  134,  218,  230,  239,  413 

Cumbervvorlli,  3  B.  &  Acl. 

108,    13 
1  N.  &  P.  197. 

S.  C.  4  A.  &  E.  731  244 

Curghey,  Burr.  782  165 

Customs  (Collector),  1  M.  & 

S.  261  257,  293 
2  M.  & 

S.  223  259 
Commrs.  5  A.  &  E. 

322.    6.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  536     S. 

C.  2  H.  &  W.  247.    S.  C.  6  N. 

&  M.  S.  828  113,  115 
Cutlers'   Company,  Cas.  t. 

Hard.  129  116,  193,  292 

Dal  by,  3  Q.  B.  602  65,  66 

Danser,  6  T.  R.  642       107,  110 

Darlington  School,  12  L.  J., 

N.  S.,  124,  Q.  B.     S  C.  6  Q. 

B.  682,  707.     S.  C.  14  L.  J.  N. 

S.  67,  Q.  B.  13,  173,  201,  202, 
254,  380,  381,  385,  397,  399 
Dartmouth  (Earl),  1    D.  & 

M.  126.     S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  878        207, 
242,  452 
(Mayor).  3  Salk. 


239 


186, 194,  256,  310,  370 
2   D.,  N. 


S.  980.     S.  C.  12  L.  J..  N.  S. 

83,  M.  C.  307,  381,  385 

Davie,  9  A.  &  E.  371       63,181, 

182 

Davies,  2D.  &  R.  209,  234 

201,  212 

Dpv,  Say.  202  111 

Dean,  2  Q.  B.  731  236 

Dean  Inclosure  (Commrs.), 

2  M.  &,  S.  80  18,  19,  25,  131 

Depttbrd   Pier,   1  P.  &  D. 

128.     S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  910    28,  32, 

86,  87,  292,  294,  420 

Denbysh.  (J.),  East,  142         135 

14  East,  284  29. 

202 
9  D.  509    219  233 

Derby  (Councillors),  2   N. 

«fe  P.  589.  S.  C.  7  A  &  E.  419. 

«.  C.  W.  VV.  &  D.  671     12,  29,  69, 
99,  100 

(Mayor),  2  Salk.  436     16, 

55,  314,  337 
Cas5.  t.   Hard. 


R.  V.  Derby,  (J.),  4  T.  R.  488         30, 
219,  239 

Nol.  29         232,  2a 

1  D.  386  232 

6  A.  &  E.  612      219 

6  A.  &  E.  885. 


S.  C.  1  N.  &.  P.  148,  n.  (a)  218, 23.3, 

237 
1  N.  &  P.  703. 

S.  C.  W.  W.  «&  D.  248  233 

3N.  dz-P.  .591      218 

7  Q.  B.  193.    S. 

C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  84,  Q.  B.         136 
Devises,  Bull.  N.  P.   196, 

204  293 

Devon,  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  410    134, 

232 

4  M.  &  S.  422        232 

1  Chit.  34       219,  237, 

238.  239,  418 

1  B.  &  A.  558         276 

8  B.  &  C.  040,  n. 

(a)  218 

Dewsbury  Roads,  4  Jur.  26     169 

Divisional  Jnstices,  1  All.  & 

Nap.  269  62 

—  Dolgelly  Union,  8  A.  &  E. 
561.  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  542.  S. 
C.  1  W.  W.  &  H.  513        29,  130, 

136, 174,  184,  185,  341,  412 

—  Doncaster  (Mayor),  2  Ld. 
Ken.  391  202 
Say.  37. 

S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.   1566.     S.  C. 
1  Barn.  264.     S.  C.  Bull.N.  P. 
201,  205        39,  55,  186,  196,  198, 
199,  200,  267,  323,  .353 
Burr.  738  56 


153  127,  128,  195, 196,  197 

Derbysh.  (J),  1   VV.   Blac. 

605.     S.  C.  Burr.  1991  119 


200,  354,  357,  373,  375,  402 

7  B.  &C. 

630.     S.  C.  5  M.  &  R.  545         55, 
57, 127 

—  Dorchest.  (J.),  Stra.  393.  S. 

C.  1  Barn.  82.  221,  222 

Dorsetsh.  (J.),  15  East,  198 

207   2.32 

Dover  (Mayor),  Stra.  407   '  329, 

335 

16  L.  J.,  N.  S. 

97,  M.C.         58,59,187,195,348 

D'Oyly  (Dr.),  12  A.  &  E. 

139  69,  270 

Drake,  6  M.  &  S.  116    41,  240, 

411 

Dublin    (Dean),  Stra.    540. 

S.  C.  8  Mod.  28.     S.  C.  1  P. 
Wms.  348.       2,  3,  4,  5,  12,  39,  61, 
64.  93,  94,  100,  178,  185,  226,  227, 
272,  309,  321,  329,  375,  396,  402, 

403 


zxz 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


R.  V.  Dullingham  (Myaor),  1  P. 

&,  1).  172.     IS.  C.  8  A.  &  E. 

858  lo9,  100,  419 

Dunelmensem,  Burr.  567        20, 

272,  274 

Durham   (Corp.),   10  Mod. 

146  263,  264,  302 

(Mayor),  Burr.  129, 

i;U  90.  349,  428 

(J.),  10  L.  J.,  N.  S. 

112,  M.  C.  219,232 

Dursley,  (Churchwardens), 

6  N.  &  M.  335.    S.  C.  5  A  &  E.  10 
10,  IS,  08 

Dyer,  1  Salk.  ISl.  S.  C.  Ld. 

Raym.  1406  203 

2  A.  <fe  E.  608.  S.  C.  4 


N.  &  M.  550     17,  51,  210, 248, 241, 

418 

Earle,  Burr.  1 197         45,  90.  94 

Eastern  Counties   Railway, 

2  P.  &  D.  656  31,  244,  2S7 

10   A. 

&  E.  515,  557.     S.  C.  4  P.  & 
D.  48.     S.  C.  1  Bail.  Cas.  509 
11.  12,  1.5,  18,  24.  28,  39,  31,  108, 
131,  243,  244,  280,  286,  287,  288, 
292,  320,  322,  323,  328,  337,  349, 
351,  352,  359,  373,  375,  376,  385, 

413 

2  Rail. 


Cas.  260.     S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S. 

303,  Q.  B.  243 
1  G.  & 

D.  589.     S.  C.  2  Y.  B.  347.    S. 

C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  66,  a.  B.  85 
2  G.  & 


D.  1.     S.  C.  2  a  B.  .569.  S.  C. 
11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  178,  a.  B.  243,  327, 

416 
2   D., 


N.  S.  948.     S.  C.  12  L  J.,  N, 

S.  271,Q.  B.  85,66,110 
2  Jur. 

365  85 
4   Jur. 

318  243 
East  India  Company,  4  M  & 

S.  283  17,  21,  122,  234,  301 
4  B.  & 


Ad.  530.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  335     122, 
234,  285,  206 

East   Lancashire  Railway, 

16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  127,  a  B.  85,  294, 
295,  306,  310,  330 
Eaton,  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  93,  M. 

C.  206 
Ecclesall,  11  A.  &  E.  612      211 

Ediaston  (Churchwardens), 

1  N.  (Si  P.  20,  572.  S.  C.  VV. 


W.  &  D.  103.     S.  C.  1  Jur.  53 

220,  221,  289,  297 
R.  V.  Edwards  1    W.  Blac.  637. 
S.  C.  Burr.  2105  220,  423 

Edy  vean,  3  T.  R.  3.'>2     165, 331 

Effingham,  2B.&.  Ad.  393, 

n.  (a)  219,  235 

Elkins,  1  W.  Blac.  640  423 

Ellis,  2  D  ,  N.  S.  361.  S.  C. 

361.     8.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  96, 
Q.  B.,  and  20.  M.  C.  119,224, 

22.5,  234,  240,  241,  242,  291,  318 

Ely  (Ep.)  1  W.  Blac,  54,  S. 

C.  1  Wils.  266      11,  10.  17,  77,  78, 

80,  111,   185,  273,  274,  297,  304, 

314,  335 

■ 1  W.  Blac.  76.    S. 

C.  Burr.  158.  S.  C.  1  Ld.  Ken. 
441  273 

Andr.176,181,183 

03,  76, 77,  78,  80, 93,  110,  226, 246, 

275 
2  T.  R.  290,  345. 


S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  90,  n.  (li)     10,  16, 

78,  79,  80,  166,  176,  274,  275,  299, 

4.32 

5  T.  R.  475     274,  275 

2   M.  &  R.   127 

S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  112  84,  9.5,  147 
England    (Bank),  2  Doug. 

526  18,  20,  294,  323 
2  B.  &  A. 


622      5,  12,  23,  46,  83,  95,  97,  323, 

402 

—  Esham    (Mayor),   2    Barn. 
265  423 

Essex  Commrs.  1  B.  &,  C. 

477.     S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  700         121 

(J.),  2  Chit.  385      219,  232 

323 

5  M.  &  S.  513        222 

1  B.  &  A.  210  219, 232 

4  B.  &  A.  373     10, 01, 

134 

7  D.  &  R.  658        133 

3  B.  &  Ad.  741        207 

1  D.  539  222 


Evans.  1  Show.  282.     S.  C. 

4  Mod.  31.     S  C.  12  Mod.  13. 

S.  C.  Holt,  188  214,  215,  253,371 

1  Q.  B.  352      1.58,  159 

Everdon  (Manor),  16  L.  J., 

N.  S.  18,  Q.  B.  155 

—  Everet,  Chas.  t.  Hard.  201      31, 

483,  189,  304 

Evesham  (Corp.),  Kely,  243 

(Mavor),  7  Mod. 

166.     S.  C.  Stra.  949.     S.  C.  2 

Barn.  236,  267  37,  38,  75,  .56, 

185,  331,  332,  344 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


ZZXl 


R.  V.  Evesham  (Mayor),  3  N.  &, 
P.  851.     S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  iJGG      94, 

292 

■ Excise  CoiDmrs.,   2    T.  R. 

385  4,  122,  288,  292,  295 

G  Q.  B.  975. 

S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  179,  Q. 

B.  122, 286 
Exeter  (Chapter),  12  A.  & 

E.  520  181,  182 
(Denn),  2  Show.  217. 

S.  C.  2  Mod.  316  43, 130 

(EpO,  Palm.  51  59,  64 

. 2  East,  460  15,  29. 

63,  143,  144 
(Mayor),  1  Show.  258, 

260,  365.     8.  C.  Comb.  198.  S. 

C.  4  Mod.  33.     S.C.  [lolt,  16), 
435.     S.  C.  12  Mod.  27,  251      39, 
40,  1S7,  196,  197,  lii8,  199,   201, 

202,  203,  330,  353,  403 

Ld.  Raym.  223. 

364,  432 

(R.),  3  G.  &  D.  167. 

S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  342.     S.  C.  13  L. 

J.,  N.  S.  7,  M.  C.  48 

Kye  (Bailiffs),  1  B.  &  C.  85. 

S.  C.  2  D.  &  R  172        13.  16,  96. 
97,  107,  108,  109,  12.5,  170,  199 

(Corp.),  4  B  &  A.  271  47, 

97,  199,  218 

(Mayor),  2  P.  &  I).  348. 

S.  C.  9  A.  &  E.  670.     S.  C.  8 
L.  J.,  N.  S.,  Q.  B.  142     57,  58,  59, 
296,  297,  305,  407 

Fall,  1  G.  &  D.  118.     S.  C. 

1  (i.  B.  636.  S.  C.   5  Jur.  887 
70,  135,  205,    208,  381,  392,  393, 
39.5,  396,  419,  434 

Farringdon  Ward,  4  D.  &  R. 

735  40,  41 

Faversham  Freefisher?,  8  T. 

R.  352         123,  126,  127,  200,  204, 

3.58 

Featherstonhaugh,  Burr.  530 

401 

Fenton,  1  G.  &  D.  17.  S.  C. 

1  Q.  B.  480  67 

Ferraiid,  1  Chit.  745.    S.  C. 

3  B.  &  A.  260  92 

Field  4  T.  R.  125     20,  143,  144 

7  East,  348  b  248 

Fisher,  Say.  160  222,  298 

Fleet  (Warden),  3  Mod.  335 

73 

Flintsh.  (J.),  7  T.  R.  200      109, 

218 

2  D.  &  L.  143. 

S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  163,  M. 

C.  219 


R.  V.  Flintsh,  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
50,  M.  C.  47 

10  L.  J.,  N.  S. 

55,  M.  C.  233 

Flockwold  Inclosiirc,  2Chit. 

251  14.  96,  138,  206 

Ford,  2  A.  &  E.  588.   S.  C. 

4  N.  &.  M.  451  283,  284, 

285 

Fowey  (Mayor)  4  D.  &  R. 

134.   S.  C.  5  D.  &  R.  614.     S. 
C.  2  B.  &  C.  591       10,  12,  14,  1.5, 
37,  33,  57,  179,  292,  293,  297,  330, 
331,  344 

Fox.  2  Q.  B.  240.    S.  C.  11 

L.  J.,  N.  S.  41,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  1 
G.  &  D.  566.  S.  C.  In  re  Bail- 
iff  of  Wakefield.  S.  C.  In  re 
Jewison,  5  Jur.  9S9  97,  407 

Fox,  1  W.  W.  &.  H.  4  209 

Freeman,  Ld.  Ken.  19  67 

Freshlbrd  (Churchwardens), 
And.  24  220 

Frieston    (Inhabs.),  5  B.   & 

Ad.  598  218,  230,  231, 

232 

Frost,  8  A.  &  E.  822.    S.  C. 

1  P.  &  D.  75.    S.  C.  1  W.  W. 
&  II.  064        51,  94,  283,  284,  289, 
304,  413 

Gaborian,  1  East,  82  94 

Gadsby,  1  N.  &  P.  572         221, 

289,  319 

Gamble,  11  A.  &  E.  69.   S. 

C.  3  P.  &  D.  123.     S.  C.  9  L. 
J.,  N.  S.  2  Q.  B.         18,  19.  21,  25, 
31,  120,236,243 

Gardner.  1  N.  &  P.  308.  S. 

C.  6  A.  &  E.  112  86 

Gaskin  (Dr.),  8  T.  R.  209       53, 

200,  201,  203, 
212,  380 

Gilkes,  8  B.  &.  C.  439.     S. 

C.  2  M.  &  R.  4.54  128 

Glamorgan  (Mayor),  2 

Smith,  8  392,  400 

(Inhabs.),  12 

Mod.  403  406 

Glamorgansh.  (J.),  15  L.  J., 

N.  S.  110,  M.  C.  238,  417 
Glide,  12  Mod.  29.    See  Ex- 
eter (City)  V.  Glide,  and  R.  v. 
Glide                              40,  353,  355 

Gloucester  (Ep.)  2  B.  &  Ad. 

158  13,  14,  117,  145, 

185  249 

. (J.),  1  Doug.  191  '  109, 

218 

. —  6  N.  &  M.  117    10, 

133 


TABLE     OF    CASES. 


R.    V.     Gloucester,    (Mayor),     3 
Biilst.  ]'J0,  1K{).    S.  C.  1  Roll. 
409.  S.  C.  2  Show.  504         38,  39. 
40,  200,  203,  263,  314,  311, 
353,  303 

(M.-iynr,)    Holt, 

450  56,  l'J-2,  19,s,  313,  ?.14, 

315,  316 

i    D.  & 

iM.677.  S.  C.   5  Q.  B.  S62.  S. 

C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  233,  Q.  B.        51 

(iloucestersh.  (J.),  3  M.  &  S. 

127  137 

15   East,  582 

202 

1  B.  &  Ad. 

2  207,  230,  231,  232,  236,  237 

2  D.  &  R. 

45,48 
3  D.  298      218 


426 


1  P.  &  D. 

S.  C.  7  A.  &  E.  480     S.  C. 


47 


249. 

9  A.  &  E.  338 

Godolpinn  (Ld.),  8  A.  &  E. 

347.  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  488        16,29, 
240,  303,  304 
-1  D.  &  L.  831. 


S.  C.  13L.J.,N.  S.  57,  M.  C.  221, 

222 

Godwin,  1  Doug.  307  172, 

2G3 

Goodrich,  2  Smith,  388  42 

Gordon,  1  B.  &  A.  524,  526, 

n.  o.  223,  370 

Gowor  (Dr.),  3  Salk.  230     1,77, 

190 

Grampound  (Mayor,)  0  T.  R. 

301  27, 54,  56,  278,  303 

7  T.  R. 

699  56.  368, 369 

Grantham,  (Corp.)  2  W.  Blac. 

716  149,  152 

Gravesend,  (Mayor,)  2  B.  & 

C.  602.      !S.  C.  4  D.  &  R. 
117  12.5,  177,  199 

Gray's  Inn,  1  Doug.  3-53  75 

139,  139,  272 

Greame,  2  A.&E.  614         134, 

413 
Great  Farrinjidon  (Church- 
wardens,) 9  B.  it  C.  .541  223 

Great  Western   Railway,  1 

D.  &  M.  471.  S.  C.  5  Queen's 
Bench,  597.  S.  C.  1  D,  &  L. 
874  86,  285,  413, 

490,  421 

Green,  Skin.  670.    S.  C.  Ld. 

Raym.  152,    S.  C.  5  Mod. 
316  62, 119,  429,  432 


R.  V.  G  reen,  6  A.  &  E.  548.     S.  C. 
IN.  &,  P.  631  11,30,52,94, 

287 

Greene,  4  Q,  B.  653  420 

(inlliths,  5  B.  &  A.  731.   S. 

C.  nom.    R.  v.  Brittol  (Mayor,) 
1  D.  &.  R.  389  53,  176,  192, 

201,  288,  292,  S^fi, 
401, 402 

Grimes,  Burr.  2.599        200,  201 

Guildford   (App.    Men),    1 

Lev.   102.     S.  C.   Raym.  152. 

S.   C.   1    Keb.   623,  663,  680. 

S.  C.  2  Keb.  1,  623  43,  130, 

191,  192, 193, 

197,  199,  310, 

318,  341 

Guise,  3   Salk.  88.     S.    C. 

Lord  Raym.   1003.     S.    C.    6 
Mod.  99  70,  73,  187,  189, 

194 

Gunmakers'  Company,   W. 

Kel.  280  126 

Guy,  6  Mod.  89  412 

Hale    (Dr.),    IP.     &  D. 

297.  S.  C.  9  A.  &  E.  339 

153,  154 

Halifax   (Overseers),  10  L. 

J.,  N.  S.  e-1,  M.  C.  206 

Hall,  1  H.  &  W.  83  224 

4  N.  &  M.  546  224 

Halls,  3  A.  &  E.  494  210 

240.  241 

Halse,  1  Keb.  20  55,  260, 

319,  3S6,  430 

Hamstall,  (Inhabs.),    3    T. 

R.  382  222 

Hantz    (J.),    1  B.    &     Ad. 

658  22,25,91,99,119,240, 

241 

Hare,  13  East,  188  121.  412 

414 

Harewood,  2  East,  177  186, 

189 

Harham  Roads,  4  Jur.  50        85, 

373,  37.5 

Harland,  8  A.  &  E.  626         124 

llarnham  Roads,  5  Jur.  408 

413,  420 

Harris  (Dr.).  Burr.  1420.  S. 

C.  1  W.  Blac.  430  23,  .35, 

70,  71,  72,  168,  187,  189, 

194,  249,  278,333,353, 

402,  403,  412 

V.  Harrison,  Burr.  1323.    S, 

C.      1  W.  Blac.  372  99,  12-5, 

126 

10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  53, 

M.  C.  21,  205,  416 


TABLE    OF     CASES. 


XXXIU 


R.  V.  Harwich,  fRrayor),  1  P.  &  E.559. 

D.  134.     8.  C.  8  A.  «Sl  E.  919. 

S.  C.  8  L.  J  ,  N.  S.  13  Q.  B.  57,  58, 

187 
Tlarwood,  8   Mod.  380,  I.d. 

Kayin.  1405      70,  72,  73, 187.  188, 
194.  229 

naslemcre(Corp.),  Say.  1(16 

331,  332,  333 
HflFtintrs  (Ld.),  1   D-  &•  M. 

132.     S.  C.  6  Q.  R  141.    rf.  C. 

13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  Ill,  M.  C.  48 
(Mayor),    Cas.    t. 

Hard.  362  321 
5   B.    & 


S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  53        15& 
156,  160 


A.  692,  n.  («) 


150 
1  D. 

&  R.  149  lOS,  109 

Havering  (Steward),  5  B.  & 

A.  691  108,  109,  150 

Haworth,  12  East,  555      67,  74 

Hay   (Ur.),  Burr.  2295.     S. 

C.  1  \V.  Blac.  445,  640  27,  33, 35, 
36,  105,277,278.  412 
Hearle,  Stra.  625.     S.  C.  3 

Bro.  P.  C.  178.  See  R.  v.  Hull.  397 
. float hcote,  Fort.    290.      S. 

C.  10  Mo  I.  51,  61         2,  15,  17,  37, 

81,  183,  296,  303.  326.  336.  403, 
421,  422,  423,  436,  442 

Heaven,  2  T.  R  772         38,  40, 

190,  191,  197,  201,  203 
Hedger,  4  P.  &  D.  52.     S. 

C.  12  A.  &  E.  139.    S.  C.  9  L. 

J.,  N.  S.  117.  M.  S.  69,205 
Hel.stoii  (Mayor),  Stra.  555    180 

Henchirian    (Dr.).    Cas.    t. 

130.  n.  («)        70, 72,  73,  187,  189. 

194 
Hendon  (Inhabs.),  2  D.  &,  R. 

449  222 

. (Manor).  2   T.  R. 

484  155,  1.57,  1-58,  159 

• Hereford.   1  Keb.   655.     S. 

C.  1  Sid.  209  262,  263 
(Mayor)    6     Mod. 

309.     S.  C.  2  Salk.  701.     S. 

C.  Ld.  Raym.  560  262,  309.  316, 
332,  342 

Hertfordsh.    (J.),    1    Chilt. 


700 


561 


103 

3  T.  R.  504 

109,  218.  237 

4  B.  &  Ad. 

237 
8  D.  636       218 
725,  730 

1(14,  1(16, 


Hevvef5,  3  A.  &.  :  . 

S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  139 

109.  111.  112,238 
Hexham   (Manor,)  5  A.  &. 

April,  1852.— 3 


R.  V.  Heydon    (Aldermen).    Sny. 
203  165,  167,  299 

Hey  ward,  1    M.  &  S.   628 

28.29.30.275,416 

Hill,  1  Show.  203,  253.     S. 

C.  nom.   Lambert's  case,  Carth. 
170.     S.  C.  12Mod.  3        116,249. 
348,  351 

Hinchcliffe,  16  L.  J.,  N   S. 

78,  M.  C.  47 

Holbeche,  4  T.  R.  779  14, 

220,  299 

Holford,  2  Barn.  330,  350    '    58, 

94,  313 

Holland,  1  T.  R.  662  41 

Holmes  (Mayor  of  VVigan), 

Burr.  1641  57,  246,  365,  866, 

367 

Holt,  3  Keb.  667.    S.  C.  Sir 

T.  Jon.  52  175,200,201,246, 

313.  314,  315,  316,  319 

Hopkins,  1  Q.  B.   161.     S. 

C.  4  P.  &  D.  550.     S.  C.  10  L. 

J.,  N.  S.  63,  Q,.  B.      18,  20,  21,  51, 
107,  136,  320,  323 
Hornby.     See  Banker's  case. 

Horsley   (Inhabs.),  8  Eatt, 

408  33 

Horton,  1  T.  R.  374  205 

Hoskms,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  188    165, 

341,  342,  365,  367 

Houseof  Correction  (Govr.), 

2  N.  &  M.  138  227,  411 

ilui/hes,  4B.  &C.  379  351 

3  A.    &    E.  429. 

S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  94  12,  52,  91, 

210,  224,  240.  284,  301,  418 

—  Hull,  11  Mod.  390.  S.  C. 
nom.  R.  V.  Hearle,  Stra.  62.5. 
S.  C.  3  Bro.  P.  C.  178.  S.  C. 
Ld.  Raym.  1447.         167,  168,  178, 

188,  3.54,  401 

(Mayor),  Sira   578  335, 337 

Railway,   8   Jiir.   491. 

S.   C.   13  L  .'.'  N.  S.  2.37.  Q. 
B.     S.  C.  6  Q,  B.  70        20,  23.  86, 

417 

(Recorder).  3  N.  &  P. 

595.     S.  C.  8  A.  &  K.  638        276 

Hiin!Terrord  Market,  2  B.  & 

Ad.  204  .-iOl,  406 

4  B,  & 

Ad.  204     S.C.  1  N.  &,  M.  112 

H5,  87,  373 

2  N.  & 

M.  340.     8.  C.  1  A.  &.  E.  668      85 

Hiintingdon?h,  (J.),  5  D.  & 

R.  588  91 


XXXIV 


TABLE    OF    CASES. 


R.  V.  Ilutcliinsoii,  8  Mod.  99.     S, 
C.  Fort.  200        195, 196,  197,  199. 

353 

_:_-   llyth   (Mnyor.)  5  A.  &  E. 
832.     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  239  57 

lllclieslcr  (Bailifls),  2  D.  & 

R.  724.     S.  C.  4  D.  &,  K.  320. 

S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  764  108,  149, 

357.  370 

Injrleton,  (Manor).  8  D.  693  100 

Inj^'ram,  1  W.  Blac.  49      52,  84. 

94 

Ipswich  (Bailiffs),   1   Barn. 

407  46,  324,  335 

2     Salk. 

434.     S.  C.    Ld.    Rayrn.  1233. 

S.C.  Holt,  443  186.196.199, 

202,  203,  204,  247,  299,  315.  318, 

345.  347,  349, 

403.  408 

7  East,  81 

140 
_ (R.),8  D.  103  51 


Jay,  3   Keb.   714.     S.  C.    1 

Vent.  302  101,  102,  192,  198, 

3()4 

Jennings,  2  Jur.  179  226 

Jeves,  3  A.   &  E.  421.     S. 

C.  5  N.  &  M.  104.     S.  C.  1  H. 

&.  VV.  325  4,  7,  9.  25,  30.  84,  97, 
103,  104,  131,  280 

Johnson,  Stra.  261        203 

4  M.  &  S,  515    25. 

103 

JoHP?,  Stra.  704  287 

2  Barn.  239     91,  92,  304 

6  T.  R.  28  140 

Jorden  185 

Juiham,3  T.  R.  575  28,  88, 

118,  186,  193,294,413,414 

Jukes,  8  T.  R.  625  230,239 

Kelk.  12  A.  &,  E.  5.59.     S. 

C  4  P   &  D.  185.     S.  C.  1  G. 

&  1).  127.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  600. 

S.  C.  9  L.  J..  N.  S.  362,  Q.  B. 

S.  C.  5Jur.  888  89,120,309, 

348,  319,  381,  392,  395,  411,  417, 

428 
Kelvcdon,   (J.),  5  A.  &  E. 

690  218 

Kendall,  4  P.  &  D.  603.  S. 

C.  Q  B.  361.      S.  C.  10  L.  J  , 

N.  8.  137,  Q  B.   118,  137,2.-^4.267, 

271,  272,  281,  2S5,  286,  322,  323, 

338,  349,  351,  353,  3.57,  360,  :<66. 

370,  373,  374,  378 

Ken.^inprfon.Q.  B.  &  Ad.  740  206 

Kent.  (J.).  6  .M.  &  6.  2.58         30 

11  East,  230  14,  92, 

93 


R.  V.  Kent  (J.),  14  Enst,  306    13.  14, 

15.  31,  32,  142,  230,  231,  232,  2.S6, 

275.  276,  289 

8  B.  &  C.  639    218, 

237 

9  B.  &  C.  289      29, 

222.  232,  28.5,  290 

4  N.  &  M.  299    271 

2  Q.  B.  686.  S. 

C.  2G.  &  D.  152.    S,  C.  11  L, 

J,  N.  S.  26  M.  C.  147,219 

Kf.^teven  (J.)  1  D.  &,  M.  113. 

S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  810.    S.  C.  13  L. 
J.,  N-  S.  78,  M.  C.      219,  231,  233, 

235 

Kiddy,  4  T>.  &  R.  735        41,  92 

Kirfibolloti  (Inhabs.),  0  A.  & 

E. 604  218 
Kinffscleere  (Churchwar- 
dens). 2  Lev.  18.  >-'ee  lie's  case  69, 
89,  151,  152,  153,  175,  211,  254 

Kinjr's  Lynn  (J.),  3  B.  &,  C. 

147.    S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  778        251, 
290,  292 
Newton  (Inhabs.),  1 

B.  &  Ad.  830  135 

Kingston  upon  Hull  (Mayor), 

8  Mod.'210.  S.  C.  Str-578.  S. 

C.  11  Mod.  382  93,  125,  310,  324 
Kirke,  5  B.  &  Ad.  1089  37,417, 

419,  420 

Knapton,  2  Keb.  445  262 

Kynaston,  1  Enst,  116  218 

Lacv,  5  B.  &  C.  706  132 

Lanlbeth,  12  Mod.  3.    S  C. 

Cirlh.  170.    S.  C.  1  Sid.  209, 
210  42.226 
(Parish),  12  Mod.  3  72 

Ad.  651  68 
3  N.  &  P. 

416.  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  356.  S. 

C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  113  M.  C.  69.70 

Lancash.  (J.),  12  East,  366  134, 

291 

1  B.  &,  A.  630  137 

5  B.  &.  A.  755  90 

7  B.  &  C.  691  14, 

218,  232,  23.<,  2:^7 

1  D.  &  U.  485  205, 

432,  433,  434 
2  M.  &  R.  510. 

S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  593  132,134 
1  G.  &.  D.  146 

S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  85  219 
3  G.  &  D.  296. 

S.  C.  4  Q  B  910  219 
10  L.  J.,  N.  S. 

10<,  M.  C.  67 
3  Q.  B.  367. 


TABLE     OF    CASES. 


aczxT 


S,  C.  2  G.  &,  D.  714.    S.  C.  12 

L.  J.,  N.  S.  76.  M.  C.  219,  239 

R.  V.  Lancash.  (J.),  12  L.  J.,  N.  S. 

110, 1  M.  C.  282 

1  D.  &  M.  488  219 

2  Barn.  430    205, 

347 
Land  Tax  Commissioners,  1 

T.  R.  148  173,  174,  181 

Lane,  11  Mod.  270.     S.  C. 

Fort.  275.  S.  C.  Lord  Raym. 
1304  56,  192,  195,  198 

Lanjrlev,  5  Q.  B.  619,  n.  (g)  201 

Larwood,  4  Mod.  269  251 

Lee,  1    Show.  252.    S.   C. 

Carth.  169.  S.  C.  3  Lev.  309. 
3  Mod.  334.  See  Lciirh's  case 
and  R.  v.  Oxenden    29,43,  75,152, 

153,  3.50 
Leeds  Canal,  3  P.  &  D.  174. 

S.  C.  11  A.  &  E.  816      60,87,291 

(J),  4  T.  R.  .583  10 

(Mayor),  Stra.  640      190 

7  A.  &  E. 

963.    S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  145.    S. 


C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  112.  Q.  B. 
4  P.  &  D. 


632 


11  A.  &E. 


100 


94 


512 


101,  180,  182,  297 
4  Q.  B. 796  418 


(Railway),  5  N.  &  M, 

246.     8.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  683  85 

Leicester  221 

(Ep.),  7  D.  &.  R. 

70S  302 
(J.\  4  B.  &  C  891. 

S.  (J  7  D.  &  R.  370  52,  103,  209, 
283,  302,  305,  323,  324,  379,  4U9 
(Mayor),    Burr. 

2087  39,40,  55, 191,  196,  197, 198, 
201, 402 
Leicpstersh.  (J.),  1  M.  &  S. 

444  109,  110,  III,  112,  230,281, 
236,  237,  238,  320 

4  D.  633  218 

Lewis,  1  Barn.  166.     S.  C. 

tStra.  855.     S.  C.  Fitzir.  85.  S. 


C.  Sess.  Ca.68,  pi.  2 
I  I).  530 


Leyland,  3  M.  &  S.  184 


214 

135 
168, 
180 

Lincoln,  (Ep.),  2  T.  R.  338  273, 

274,  275 

(Mayor),    5    Mod. 

404  272 


-  12  Mod. 


190,  n.  (a).  S.  C.  Carth.  448. 
S.  C.  5  Mod.  339,  402.  S.  C. 
Ld.  Raym.  203  125,  126,  315 


R.  V.  Lincoln's  Inn,  7  D.  &  R.  368. 
S.  C.  4  B.  &  C.  855    LS  21,27,  2«, 
29,36,  79,  126.  13a,  139,  207,  273 
Lincolnih  3  B.  ^  C.  548         48 

Lilchlield   (Archdeacon),    5 

N.  &  M.  42.  S.  C.  1  ]I.  &  W. 
463  71,  73,  298 

(Ep.)  Stra.    1023. 

S.  C.  7  Mod.  218.  S.  C.  2Keb. 
287.     S.  C.  And.  367.    S.  C.  2 
Barn.  365,  429— see  R.  v.  Rush- 
worth   12,  23,  144.  177,  201,  213, 
253,  254,  2.55,  29:-!,  3.53 

(Mayor),  1  G.  &  D. 

28.     S.  C.  1  Q   B.  453.    S.  C. 
5  Jur.  889.      S.  C.  6  Jnr.  624. 
S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S  1J2,  Q  B. 
S.  C.  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  333,  Q,.  B.    51. 
58,  59,  415 

2  Q.    B. 

693.     S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  10  58 

Littleport,  6  Mod.  97.  S.  C. 

Fol.  8.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  .531.  S. 
C.  3  Salk.  232.  S.  C.  Ld. 
Raym.  10(19.  S.  C.  10  Mod. 
104.     S.  C.  Holt, .579  221,338,380 

Liverpool  (City),  1  Barn.  81  93, 

268,  299 

(Customs),  2  M.  &. 

S.  223  16,  29 

. (Mayor),     Burr. 


723,731  39,5.5,101,  190,  192, 
195,  198,  199,  2(10,  202,  203, 
351,  3.53,  354,  357,  358,  3.59, 

375,  3^3,  402 
. 3   N.  & 


P.  280.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  176  88. 
14.5,  213 
Railway,  6  N.  &. 

M.  180.     S.  C.  4  A.  &  E.  650     85 

—  LlandiUo  Roads,  2  T.R.232  15, 

131,  132 

Lloyd,  Stra.  996  215 

London  (Aldermen),  2  B:irn. 

398  75,  84,  257 
. Assurance,  5  B.  & 

A.  901.  S.  C.  1  D.  4^  R.  510  22, 
28,  53,  82,  83 
(City),  Skin.  293, 

301.    S.  C.  4  Doug.  360  '  39 

1  Show.  240  187 

2  Barn  398  173 


Dock,  6  N.  &  M. 


390.  S.  C-  5  A.  &  E.  163  85,  261. 
353,369,373,  411 
(Ep.),  1  Show.  282, 

n.  (/O  215 
1  VVils.  11. 

S.    C.   nom.    Lecturer   of    St. 

Anne.  Stra.    1192.      S.  C.   13 


XXXVl 


TABLE    OF   CASKS. 


Knst.  430,  n.     15,  2:?.  29,  :50,  33, 59, 

()2, 122, 143, 144,  145. 149,  171,  173, 

178,  227,254,  207 

R.  V.  London  {F.\\).  1  T.  R.  :!3l     2i), 

115,  143,  144,  145,293,  412 

13  East,  420  15, 

29,  117,  143,  144,  140.  199,  2-4, 
297,  313,  314 

(.1.).  liiiir.  1450       24U 

15  L.  J.,  N.  S. 

127,  M.  C.  233 
(Mayor),  1  Sliow. 

2S9.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  53  180 
10  Mod. 

53  43,  303 
12  Mod. 


17.  S.  C.  Skin.  293  39,  370,  371 
2  Show. 

69  246 

Holt,  109  201 

M.     26 

G.  3,  B.  R.  203 
4  Doufj. 

360  39, 357 
1  T.    R. 

140  160 
1  T.   R. 


423 


45,  115,  184,  185,  288,  292 
2  T.    R. 


177        53,  101,  171,  174,  175,  182, 
135,  190,  192,  19;^,  199,  201,  203, 
211,  253,  281,  2^8,  292,  294,  359 
2  T.  R. 


182,  n.  (6)  60,  75,  84,  151,  153, 
173,  174,  186,  191,  192,  211,  258 
15  East, 

031  222, 232 
5  B.   «& 


Ad.  233 


303,304,  300,  413,426 
9  B.    ife 


C.  21.    S.  C.  4M.  &R.  46    13,38, 

90,  97,  190,  191,275,  297,300.  301, 

302,  380,411 

3   B.    & 


Ad.  254.  S.  C.  2  N.  &  M.  120  13, 
14.  3S  117,  IS.),  180, 19S  199,  3(19, 
349,  360,  361,  374,  375,  377,  2-^1, 
3::3,  3>34,  380,  392,  392,  397,  420, 

431 

1    N.    &. 

JM.  2?5  360 

1   D.    & 

M.  484.  S.  C.  5  a.  B.  555.  S. 
C.  13  L.  J.,N.  S.,  M.C.  S.  C. 
1  D.  &  L.  800,  nnm.  Ex  parte 
Fletcher  228 

(Mayor),  16     L.  J., 

N.  S.  185  43,  44,  357,  384 

Railway,   4    N.   &. 

M.  458.     S  C.  2  A.  &.  E.  673      85 


R.  V.  London    Railway,  2    P.   & 

D.  243.  S.  C.  10  A.  &,  E.  3  85 
2   G.   & 

D.  414.     S.  C.  3  Q.   B.   106. 

S.    C.    11    L.  J.,  N.    S.,  186. 

Q.  B  85 
15  L.  J., 

N.  S.,  42  Q.  B.     S.   C.  D.   & 

L.  399  18,  22,  86,  98,  290,  294 
(Requests  Court),  7 

East,  295  313 
Waterworks,  1  Lev. 

123  29,  137,  142,  170 

Long,  1  Barn.  82  93,  123, 

352 
10  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  124. 

M.  C.  219 
1  G.  &  D.  367.     S. 

C.  1  Q   B.  740  97 

Love,  12  Mod.  001  100 

Lowton    Parish,    11     Mod, 

301  220,  346 

Lucas,  10  East,  235        161,  162 

Ludlani,    8    Mod.   267.     S. 

C.  Stra.  675  125,  126 

Luton    Roads,    1    G.  «Si    D. 

248.     S.  C.    1   Q.  B.  800.     S. 

C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  203.  Q.  B.     131, 

238,  292,  304,  357,   359,  395,  402, 

400,  408 

Lyme    Regis    (Mayor),     1 

Doug.  79,  134,  149.  C.  S. 
Andr.  105  40,  5(j,  73,  80,  159, 

iwi,  191,  195,  190,  197,  198,  199, 
200,201,203,  321,  334,  335,  346, 
348,  349,  350,  351,  353,  354,  356, 
357,  358,  302,  308,  309,  370,  372, 

389,  401,  402,  428,  429 

Lynn,  2  H.  &  W.  314  160 

(Mayor,)  Andr.   105 

195,  348,  351 

Lyndsay   (J.),  6  M.   &    S. 

379  218,  237,  239 

Mac  Kay,  4  B.  &  C.  658       134, 

291 

Maidstone    (Corp  ),  1  Keb. 

733  188,  349 

(Mayor,)   6    D. 

&  R.  334  ■  52, 151 

Maiden,  Burr.  2132        1^-0,  188 

(Bailiffs),   2    Salk. 

431.     S.  C.  Ld.  Rayin.  481         46, 
348,  351 

Malnicsbuvv  (Aldermen),   3 

G.  t^  1).  482.'  S.  C.  3  Q.  13. 
577.  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
318.     a  B.  S.  C.  6  Jiir.  1107 

55.  127,  395 

(Iligh    Stew- 
ard,) 4  Jur.  222         ^  81 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


R.  V.  Malmesbiiry  (Mnyor),  9  D. 

359.     S.  C.  5  Jur.  5(i().     S.  C. 

10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  1J9,  Q.  B.  4-21 
Manchester   (Burouyli),    10 

L.  J.,  N.  S.  27  Q.  JJ  87,  141 
(Cliurchwnnl- 

ens),  7  1).  707  206,  208 
(J.),    D.    &    K. 

454.     S.  C.   nom.     R.  v.   Lan- 


cansh  (J.),  5  B.  &  A.  955 

—  (Mayor),  5   Q. 


B.  402 
Railway,    8    A. 

&  E.  413.     S.  C.  3   N   &  P. 

439  295,  41.5,  420 
&,c.  Railway,  11 

A.  &  E.  950,  n.  334 

Railway,   1    G 


&.  1 1.  338.     S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  528. 

S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  269  00,  131 

244,  288,  292  349, 

397,  402, 

March,  Burr.  999  126,  373 

Marches  (Prcsulent)  see  R. 

V.  Clapham,  and  R.  v.  Win. 

Margate    Pier,  3   B.  &  A. 

223.     S.  C  2  Chii.  250         18,  19, 
24,   25,  223,   319,   320,  323,  338, 

.  375,  3S0 

Market  Street  (Commrs.), 

4  B.  &  Ad.  333,  n.  («)  83,  85 

Mariott,  1  D.  &  R  166        132, 

369 
Marriott,  12  A.  &  E  779      241 

Marsh,  4  D.  &  R.  260  92 

Marslmm,  2T.  R.  2  115 

Martin,  1  0.  &  M.  386.    S. 

C.  2  >., .  B.  1037,  n  («)  98 
13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  54, 

M.  C.  133 

Martyr,  13  East,  55  47,  48 

Maude,  2  D.,  N.  S.  58.     S. 

C.  11  I,.  J.,  N.  S.  120,  M.  C.  48 
Mein,  3  T.  R.  5!i0  414 

Merchant  Tailors,  2  B.   & 

Ad.  115        95,   121,  161,  162,  163. 

413,  416 

Merionethsh.    (J.)  1    D.   & 

M.  121.  S.  C.  6  Q  B.  163. 
^.  C  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  114,  M. 
C  219 

Middlesex    (Archdeacon),  .5 

N.  &  M.  497.  S.  C  3  A.  & 
E.  615  12,  63,  70,  72,  73,  258, 

285,  286,  290,  2i)9. 

(J.),  Sny.  148       2U5 

1  Wils.  125 

30,  207 

6  M.  &  S. 

279  91 


R.  V.  Middlesex  (J.),    2   Keny. 

163  119,224 
1  Ciiit.366, 

368  137,306,415 
16     East, 

310  232 
4  B.  &  A. 

293  47,  218,  230 
3  B.  &  Ad. 

100  89 
5  B.  &  Ad. 

1113.     S.  C.  3  N.  &L  M.   110 

111,  23S 

1  D.  116       135 

2  H.  &  VV. 

222  91 


2  A.  &  E.  606. 

S.  C.  4  N.&M.  5,  50  418 
(A.),  3  A.  &  E. 

610  181 
(J.),  5  N.  &  M. 

126  52,  224 

2  D.  163      218 

9  A.  &    E. 


540.      S.  C.   1   P.  &  D.  402. 
S.  C.  2  W.  VV.  «Si  H.  IdO      13,  16, 
17,  29,  32,  103, 
109 
3  P.  &   D. 


459.     S.  C.   11    A.  &  E.   809 

219,232 
9  L.  J.,  N. 

S.  59,  M.  C.  233 
12  L.  J.  N. 

S.  36,  M.  C.  241 
12  L.  J.,  N. 

S.  59,  M.  C.  134 
14  L.  J.,  N. 

S.  139,  M.  C.  233 
15  L.  J.,  N. 

S.  100,  M.  C.  219 
16  L.  J.,  N. 

S.  104,  M.  C.  147 
16  L.  J.  N. 

S,  135,  M.  C.  219 

4    a     B. 


807.     S.   C.    12    L.   J.,  N.  S. 

134,  M.  C.  219 
2  D.,  N,  S. 

385  224,  242 
2  D.,  N.  S. 

719  137,  302 
3  D.  &  L. 

109  222 
3  D.  &  L. 

745  219,  233 

(Lun.    Asy.    V. 


J  ),  2  G.  &  D.  300.  S.  C.  2 
Q.  B.  433.  S.  C.  11  L  J.,  N. 
S.  30,  M.  C.  63 


TABLE     OP     CASES* 


R.  V.  Middlesex,  (Register),  7  Q. 
B.  156.  S.  C.  nom.  In  re  hi- 
niey,  14   L.  J  ,  N.  S.  200,  Q. 

B.  248 
(Sheriffs),  3  G. 

&,  D.  r)49,  S.  C.  18  L.  J.,  N. 
S.,  Q.  B.  14.  S.  C.  Walker 
V.  London  iHailway,  3  Q.  IJ. 
549,  7  14.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  :-;f)5. 
S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  ;3^,  Q.  B. 

85,  86,  417 

M  idhurst  (Borough),  1  Wils. 

283.  See  R.  v.  JNIonlacute 
(Lord)  325 

Mihlpnhall    Savings'  Bank, 

2  N.  &  P.  278.     S.  C.  6  A.  & 

E.  952  252,  300 

Mildmay,  5  B.  &  Ad.  254. 

S.  C.  2  N.  &  M.  778  157,  160, 

377 

Mills.     See  R.  v.  Guildford 

(Approved  Men). 

2  B.  &  Ad.  578  14, 

219,  418 

Milverton  (Manor),  3  A.  &, 

E.  285.  S.  C.  1  IL  &  \V. 
2?2  15,  89,  148,  149,  1.50,  223, 

290,  304,  346,  408 

Menshall,  1  N.  &  M.  277, 

230 

MirehoLise,  2  A.  &  E.  6.37, 

644.     S.   C.  4  N.  &   M.  394    5L 

91,  134,  210,  224,  240,   241,  301, 

414,418 

Mizen,  1  D.  N.  S.  865  414 

Monday,  Cowp.  530         38,  188, 

342,  367 

Monmouth  (Mayor),  4  B.  & 

A.  496  57,  130,  354,  356,  370 

Monmouthsh.  (J  ),  1   B.    & 

Ad.  895        14,  110,  112,  218,  232, 

417 
4  B.    & 

C.  846.  S.  C.  7  D.  &  R.  334 
109,  110,  111,  219,  230,  232.  2.33, 

236,  237 
8  B.    & 

C.  138  230,  232,  237 
3  D.  306, 

310  14,  213 
12  L.  J., 

N.  S  ,  .M.  (J.  126  48,  218 
1    D.    & 

L   145  237 

Al.intacute    (Ld.),    1     Blac. 

61.  S  C.  num.  R.  v.  .Midhurt^t 
(Borough),  1  Wils.  283.     S.  C. 

3  M..d.  H34,  n.  (f)  5,  10,  11, 
38,  .5.5,  .57,  74,  11-5,  127,  l:<9,  141, 
148,  149,  152,  153,   154,  155,   157, 


159,  159,  167,  168,  176,   189,  227, 

2^.5,  324,  325 

R.  V.  Montague,  1  Barn.  72  123 

Montgnmorysii.  (J.),  2  D.  &, 

L.  119.     S.  G.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
142,  Q  B.  219,  233 

Morgan,  7  Mod.  322  165 

2  A.   &    E.   613. 

S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  63.     See   K. 

V.  Bucks.  (J.)  135,  224  (e) 

Morpeth  (Ball),  Stra.  59        130, 

178,  1^8,211,  229,  250,  2-53.  2.54, 
255,  2.57,  383 

(Bailifis),      Slra. 

179 
123 


897 

Morris,  Ld.  Raym.  338 

Nash,  Ld.  Raym.  98Q.      S. 

C.  1  Salk.  149  90 

Ncale,  4  N.  &  M.  868         201, 

204,  212,  213 
Nene  Outfall,    4  M.  &    R. 

647.      S.  C.  9  B.  &  C.  875        8.5, 
120,261,411 
Newbury  (Mayor),  1  Q.  B. 

751.    S.  C.  1  G  &  D.  3«8.     S. 

C.  2  G.   &  D.   109.     S.  C.  2 

Jur.  812.     S.   C.  6  Jur.  821. 

S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  149,  Q. 

B.  88,  199,  320,  323,  334,  338, 
339,  381,  395,  416 
Newcastle  (Corp.),  1   Barn. 

385  423, 424 
Newcastle  (Hostmen),  Stra. 

1223  9.5,  170,  379 
(J.),  1  B.  &   Ad. 

933  232,  325 
•    (Mayor),    com. 

nionly  called  Parolt's  case  196 
■ cited  in 


Burr.  530 


192,  196,  360 
1  Q.  B. 


751.     S.   C.  1  G    &  D.  388    384, 

416 
Newcastle-upon-Tyne  (May- 
or), 1  East,  115  388,431 

Newcomb,  4  T.  R.  368  224, 

240 

New  Coll.  2  Lev.  15.     S.  C. 

1  Mod.  82    3,  79,  80, 191, 268.  303, 
304,  347,  368 

Newell.  4  T.  R.  266  205 

New  River,  1  Keb.  269, 631    173, 

174,  262 

Newsham,  Say.  211       165,  166, 

180,  181,  299,  442 

New  Waterworks,   1   Lev. 

123.     See  Middleton's  case  79 

New   Windsor  (.Mayor),  13 

L.  J.,  N.  S.  337,  Q.  B.     S.  C.  7 
Q.  B.  908.     S.  C.  14  L.  J  ,  N. 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


S.  319,  Q.  B.     58,  187,  351.  360, 

380 
R.  V.  Norfolk  (J.),  1  D.  &  R.  69, 

75.  S.  C.  5  B.  &  A.  484    10, 13,  14, 
2 1 H,  219,  231 

1  N.  &  M.  67 

206,  207 

2  B.  &  Ad  944,  207 

3  N.  &  M.  55. 

S.  C.  5  B.  &  Ad.  9U0     218, 232, 233 

Norri.s  1  Barn.  395  127 

Norlhamptonsli.  (J.),  6  A.  &. 

E.  Ill  218 
Northern  Railway,  8  D.  329. 

S.  C.  9L.  J.,N.S.  53,  Q.  B.        85 
Northleach  Roads,  5  B.  & 

Ad.  984  16,  136,  286 
North  Midland  Railway,  11 

A.  «fc  E  955.     S.  C.  3  P.  &,  D. 

622      S.  C.  2  Rail.  Cas.  1.     S. 

C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  2«7,  Q.  B.        85, 
360,  374,  334 
North  Riding  (J.),  2  B.  &  C. 

290.    S.  C.  2  D.  «fc  R.  510       12, 13, 

14,  28,  129,  227,  228,  239,  240,  292 
7  Q.  B.  154. 


S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  91,  M.  C. 
133  331,  345 

—  North wich  Savings'  Bank,  9 
A.  &  E.  729.  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D. 
477  15,  32,  231,  252 

—  Norwich,  (Dean),  Stra.  158. 

S.  C.  Fort.  222  226,  227,  373 

(J.),  3  D,  &  R.  43 

223,  234 
(Mayor),  Stra.  5-5, 


IteO  313,314,316,  319,335,  336 
Norwich   (Mayor),  2   Salk. 

436.     S.  C.  Holt,  444.     S.  C. 

Ld.  Raym.  1244       13,  38, 117,  229, 

324.  353,  360,  361,  362,  374,  375. 
402,  403 
1  B,  &  Ad. 

310  129,  135,  ISO 
8  A.  &  E. 

633  88,  175 

3  Q.  B.  285. 


S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  605 


S.  246,  Q.  B. 


11  L.  J.,  N. 


28 


(Overseers),    Nol. 
Railway,  15  L.  J., 


223 


N.  S.  24,  Q.  B.     S.  C.  3  D.  & 
L.  3*5  19,  244,  284,  285 

—  Nottingham,  1  W.  Blac   .58 

17,  29.5,  379 

(J.),  Say.  217         41 

2  Barn.  .56 

218,  320 


R.  V.  Nottingham,  (Mayor;.  Say. 

36  ^  293.  309, 322,  373 
(Town),  I5till.  N. 

P.  201  193.  4(11,  433 
(J.),  3  A.  &   y. 

500.  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  160  52, 
103.  283 
Old     Water- 

works,   1   N.  &  P.  4-0.     S.  C. 

6  A.  &  E.  3.5.5.     S.  C.  \V.  W 

6.  D.  166         18,  19,  211,  24.27,  45, 
46,  83,  80,  9S,  141,  147,  2M2,  294, 

302.  .30.5,  379,414 
Waterwork.-", 

5  N.  &  M.  498  85 
Oakhampton  (Mayor),  1  Wils. 

332  125 
Old  Hall  (Manor),  10  A.  & 

E.  256.     S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  518. 

S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  6,50  109,111, 
1.50,  353,  360.  361,  374,375 
Oldham  (Manor),   16  L.  J., 

N.  S.  110,  M.C.  2.50 
Ollerhead,  or   R.  v.  Wigan 

(Corp.),  Burr.  782,  785  167 

Oretbrd  (Borough)  332 

Orfurd,  Say.  146  433 

Osborn,  1  Com.  240  125 

Ottery  St.  Mary,  3  G.  &  D. 

382.     S.C.  4Q  B.  1.57.     S.  C. 

12  L,  J.,  N.  S.  118,Q.  B.  28,63, 
64,  118,  140,  271 
Oundle  (Manor),  1  A.  &■  E. 

283,  297.     S.  C.  3  N.  &  M. 

484.     S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  586.         4, 

7,  155, 157, 158,  159,  379,  375,  376, 

398,  416,417 

Ouse  Bank  Commissioners, 

3  A.  &  E.  544         31,117,120,317 
328,  346,  352,  359,  374,  375,  402 

Owen,  Sirn.  669  334 

4  Mod.  293.     S.  C. 

Comb.  317  215 

5  Mod.  314.     S.  C. 

Comb.  239.  S.  C.  Skin.  669. 
S.   C.  Holt,  190  94,  326,  333, 

337,  345,406,408,  422,423 

Oxenden,  1  Show.  217,  219. 

S.  C.  nom.  R  v.  Lee,  251,  2(il, 
263.  S.  C.  Keb.  549.  S.  C.  3 
Lev.  .309.  S.  C.  Holt.  434.  S. 
C.  3  Mod.  332  S.  C.  Carth. 
169.  S.  C.  Skin.  290.  S.  C.  3 
Salk.  230  2,  12.  18,  19.  44.  70 

8i),  110,  174,  178,  212.  229,  260 

Oxford  (Corp),  Cas.  t.  Hard. 

177  180,313 

(Ep.),  7   East.   34.5, 

351  63,  93,  113,  143,  144,  ."CO 

319,320,  321,323,337,414 


xl 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


R.  V.  Oxford  (C),  7  East,  GOO,  fiOG 

49,  li:i,  320 

(Mayor), 2  Salk.  429. 

S.  C.  2  .Inn.  121.     S   C.  Iloll, 
4;H.     S.  C.  Comb.  419        10(1,  Ki5, 
175,  170,  187,  l&S,  204,  203,  4012, 

40 

G  A.  &  E. 

349.     S.  C.  1  N.  &,  F.  474  27, 
28,  81,  99.  100,  101,  160,  181.  1R2, 
192,245,  313,315,419 
Palm.  451. 


S.   C.   i\oy,   92.     S.  C.   Latcli, 

229  39,  40,  194,  201,  2(i3,  227, 
333,  34fi,  3G4,  300,  370,  422 
Koads.  4  P.  &  D.  154. 

S  C.  12  A.  &.  E.  427  132 
Oxfordsli.  (J.),   1  M.   &   S. 

440  9] 
2  B.  &  A. 

203  92 
1   B.  &  C. 

279  48 
3  G    &  D. 

349.     iS.  C.  4  Q.  B.  177.     S. 

C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  4,  M.  C.         123, 

233 
5D.  IIG        48 


Paddington  Vestry.  9  B.  &. 

C.  461  4,15,30,134,268, 

412 

Paoliam's  Level,  8  B.  &  C. 

355.  "S.  C.  2  M.  &.  R.  471    120, 
243,  297 

Palmer,  8  East,  41G    204,  205 

288,  292 

Parrott.   See  Parrott's  case     197 

Pascoe,   2   Moore  &.  Scott, 

343  90, 207 

Pate  man,  2  T.  R.  777  37, 

175,  179,  197 

Payn,  1  i\.  &  P.  52H.   S.  C. 

6  A.  &  E.  392.    S.  C.  I  W.  W. 

&  D.  99.  142.  S.  C.  2  Jur.  47     11, 

12,  25,  50,  102,  103,  104.  115,  136, 

177,  303,  329,  349,  352,  360,  3()7, 

373,  374,  415,  417 

Payn,   1  Jur.  54.      S.  C.  3 

P.  <fe  I).  623.     S.  C.  11   A.   & 
E.  955.     8.  C.  2  Rail.  Cas    1. 
tS.  C.  9  L.  J.,N.  S.  285,  Q.  B.    102, 
367,  372,  373,  375,  3!;4 

Paynter,  7  Q.  B  225.    S.  C. 

14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  179,  M.  C.  224, 

240,343 

Peach,  2  Salk.  572.     S.  C. 

nom.  Poat's  case,  6  Mod.  229       11, 
12,  189 

Pedley,  4  Barn.   &.  Adolph. 

398  236 


11:  V.  Pembroke  (Clnvdns),  5  A.  & 
E.  603.    S.  C.  1  N.  &,  P.  69         68, 

385 

(Corn.),  8  D.  302 

100,  167,315 

Pembrokcsli.    (J.),  2    East, 

212  133 

Ad.  391  15,  219,  23.5,  23G 
Pr-nrice,  Stra.  1235        348,  350 

Peterborough  (J.),  Cald.238 

205 

Pettiward  (Dr.).  Bnrr.  2152 

1X5,  432.  43:<,  434 

Phil ino ham,  1  Keb.  777      39,55 

Phippen.  7  A.  &  E.  905.    S. 

C.    R.    V.  Ricketls.  3   N.  &    \\ 
151.    S.  C.  2  Jur.  9(j6  99.  179,  180 

Physician's  Coll.,   2  Show. 

178.     S.   C.  nom    Dr.  Merit's 
case  99,  138,  139.216,217 

Burr.  21^6     55, 

9(),  124 

7  T.  R.  282  216 

Burr.  2740   217 


324,  338,  339,  380 

—  Pickles,  3  Q.  B.  599,  n.  («). 
S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  40.  Q  B. 

115,  295,  ;i  14,  413 

—  Pindar,  8  Mod.  235,  3:r2.  S. 
C.  Slra.  582,  625,  627.     S.  C. 

Ld.  Raym.  1447  180 

—  Pitt,  10  A   &  E.  272.    S.  C. 

2  P.  &  D.  385  15,  18,  23,  154, 

155,  1.57,  159 

—  Plymouth  (Boroush),  1  Bam. 

81,  130  165,  313,  319,  333 

—  Pole  442 

—  Pomfret  (Mayor),  10  Mod. 
107  55,  19S,  354,362 

—  Ponsf)rd,  1  D.  &  L.  116.    S. 

C.  12  L.  J.,  N   S.  31;^,  Q  B.  20,53 

Ponsonby,  Ves  6. 197.   S.  C. 

5  Bio.  P.  C.  287.     S.  C.  Say. 
245  197 

—  Ponlefract  (R.),  2  Q.  B.  548. 
C.  S.  2G.  &  D.  700.    C.  S.  12 

L.  J.,  N.  S.  81,  M.  C.  219,236 

Poole  (Mayor).  3   N.    &  P. 

1 19.     C.  S  7  A  &  E.  739         266 

Poole   (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D. 

728.  S.  C.  IQ  B  616.  S.  C  9 
L.  J.,  N.  S.  231,  Q.B   S.  C  10 

L.  J.,  N.  S  198,  Q.  B.     51,  ^8,  313 

338,  367,  401,  40t<,  409,  414,  422, 

423,  424 

(R.),  1  N.  &  P.756  51 


—  Poor  Law  Commis.-ioners,  1 
N.  &.  P.  371.  S.  C.  6  A.  &,  E. 
1  225 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


xli 


R.  V.  Poor  Law  Com.,  9  A.  &,  E. 
911  63 

Portsmouth  (Mayor),  3  B.  tSi 

C.  153.     S.  C.  4  D  &  'A.  7ri9, 

28,  38,  5fi.  1112,  189, 
19(1,  191,  293 

Powell,  4  P.  &  D.  719.     S. 

C.  1  Q  B  352.  S.  C.  11)  L.  J., 
N.  S   148,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  nom.  R. 
V.  Riclifiioiid,  5  Jur.  005     113, 
154,  15G,  157,  158,  159,  160,  164, 
338,  380 

(Corp.),   7    A.  &  E. 

735.  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  119      67,87, 

88 

Price,  11  A.  &  E.  735  146 

Prill,  1  Kcb.  520,  549,  594, 

609,  666       81,  246,  247,  313,  340, 
342,  35y 

Procter  212 

l{n(inor  (Earl),  4  Jiir.  460      237 

Uarlnorsh.  (J.),  2  D.,  N.  S. 

676  220 

15  L.  J.,  N. 

y.  151,  M.  C.         31,   147,218,294 

R.iines,  12  Mod.  136.    S.  C. 

12  Mod.  205.    S  C.  Saik.  299. 
S  C.  Carlli.  459.  S.  C.  3  Salk. 
162,233.     S.  C.  IJoit,31().    S. 
C.  Ld.  Kaym.  361.     8.  C.  3  P. 
Wnis.  337,  n.  (/y).    See  Kaine's 
case     II,  13,  3:^,  35,  39, 4:^,  44,  68, 
79,    101,    102,   151,   171,  189,  229, 
255,  257,  258,  277,  278,  279,  333, 
352,  357,  373,  402 
Rnnisden,  3  Adolphus  &  El- 
lis, 456  1S4 

Uawlinson,  6   B.    &  C.  23. 

S.  C.  9  D.  &  R.  7  133 
Reeti,  Cart!).   393,  417.     C. 

S.  5  Mod.  325.  S.  C.  Comb.  417. 

S.  C.  12Mod.ll6.  S.C  3  Salk. 

90.     S.  C.  1  Salk.  165.     S.  C. 

Ld.  Raym.  I:i8  70,  71 

Requests'  Court,  7  East,  272   107 

Rennett,  2  T.  R.  167       22,  154, 

155,  156,  157,  158 
Reynell,  Cas.  t.  Hard.   130, 

n,  (1)  72 
Rice,  5  Mod.  825.    S.  C.  12 

Mod.  116.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  90.  S. 

C.  Comb.  417,  S.  C.  Carth.  393 

S.C.  Ld.  Raym.  i3S         70,  72,73 

Rich,  Comb.  147  68 

Richardsnn,  Burr.  517,  538,    195 

198,  199,  204,  353,  357    401 

1  VVils.  16.  21       114 

142,  150,230,240, 
Richmond.  See  R.  v.  Powell,       1 


R.  V.  Ricketts,  10  A.  &  E  544. 

5.  C.  4  P.  &  1).  48.  S.  C.  3  N. 

6.  P.  151.     See  R.  v.  Phipi^eii     18, 

25,  s<\),  299 

Riggc,  2  Barn.  <?k  Adol.  550 

159 

Rippon  (Town),  2  Kcb.  15      36, 

354 

(Mayor),  2  Salk.  433. 

S.  C.  Ld.   Ravm.  ,563.     S.  C.  I 
Com.  86     39,56,  9;{,  192.  2(il,  315, 
3-'3,  4 111,  430 

Roberts,  3  A.  &  E  77()  l(i4,  177, 

178,  247,  249 

Robinson,  8  Mod.  336    165,  352, 

422 

Burr.  799      22, 25,  1 19 

2  Smith,  274  91 

Sira.  .555  16.5,  179 


Rociiester  (Dean),   1   Birn 

40  226.  227,  313 
3  B    &  Ad. 

95  12,  226 

Rock.s,  Ld.  Raym.   1447         1()7, 

lf.8 

Rodsrers,  2  Salk,  245,  246      102 

Roizers,  2  1).,  N.  S  673.  S^ 

C.  12  L.  J.,  N.    S.  51,  M.  C. 

239 
Rotherham  (Inliab.-.),  12  L. 

J.,  N   S.  17,  Q.  B  301 

Rotherhithe,  8  Mod.  339        221 

Round,  5  N.  &  M.  427.    S. 

C.  4  A   &E.  139.     S  C    1  H. 

6  VV.  ,546  136,  304,  320.  323, 
348,  351,  3,52,  359,  374,  :-i77,  417, 

42(5,  428 

Rowe.     See  R.   v.   Bri.-tid. 

RufFord  (lnhab.--.),Str,i.  512. 

S.  C.  Fort.  321.     S.  C  8  Mod. 
39.     S.  C.  cited  in  2  Salk.  458, 
maro-.  S.  C.  Fob-y,  9  205 
Rushworth,  Kel.  288.    S.  C. 

7  Mod.  217.     S.  C.  Comb.  44-i. 
See  R  V.  Litchfield  (Ep.)      41,  71, 
107,  125,  143,  171,  212,  2.5:^,  254, 

255,  258 

Russell,  1  I).,  N.  S.  .544         242 

Rye  (Harbour),  5  B.  &  Ad. 

1094  416 
(Mayor),  Burr.  798.    S 

C.  2  Ld.  Ken.  468  141,  342.  412, 
421,422 
St.  Albans'  (J.),  1  P.  &.   D. 

148.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  932  210 
(Mayor),  12  Ea.-^t, 

559  247 
(Parish),  11  Mod. 

206, 254  220 


xlii 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


R.  V.  Aiulrevv's  (Parish),  7  A.  &. 
E.  281  a.  S.  C.  VV.  VV.  D.  ."^OO 

221,  297,  a29,  330,  331, 

335,  330,  311, 

343,  314 

St.   Andrew's  (Parish),    10 

A.  &  E.  7oG       210,  225,  353,  35P, 

373 

13  L.  J.,  N. 

S.  341,Q.  B.  S.  C.  6Q.  B.  78 

209.  225,  411 

Aiinc's  (Rector),  Burr.  1877 

211 

Bartholomew  (Chiirchwds  ), 

3  Sulk.  80.    S.  C.  Holt,  418      145 
2  B.  &L  All.  5()0  271,  402 


—  Catherine  HtiII,4T.  R.2:^3, 
241,  435    76,  78,  89,  255, 2G7, 269, 

272,  273,  275 

—  Gonrge  (Overseers),  2  W. 
Blac.  G24  220 

—  James'  (Vicar),  5  Q.  B.  622 

2('l 

Westminster,  5  A.  (Si 

E.  391  259 


John  (Churchwardens),  16 

L.'J.,  N.  S.  54,  M.  C. 
John's  Coll.,  Comb.  237, 

277,  2<^2.     S.  C-  Holt.  436.  S. 


65 


C.  2  Keb  168.     S,  C.  4  Mod. 
233,  36S,  369.  S.  C.  Skin.  359, 
368,  393,  454.  546.     S.  C.  Ld. 
Raym.  126,  .564  3,  5,  16,  77,  78,  80 
100,  171,  1S.5,  190,  213,  26>^,  269, 
273,274,275,  299,  310,  317,  326, 
333,  336,  341,  344,  347,  3.50,  359, 
363,  264,  375,  4(»7,  40y 

Katherine  Dock,  4  B.  & 

Ad.  369.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  121 
10,  15,  45,  83,  98,  141,  169,  294, 
302,  373,  379, 
375, 377,  392 

Leonard's,  2  Salk.    483. 

S.  C.  Cas.  t.  Hard.  508  220 

• Luke's  (Vestrymen),  2  N. 

&.  M.  464  180,  183,  2  8, 

Margaret,  (Parish),  4  M.& 

S.  249,  252  22, 65,  208 

1  P.  &  D. 

116.  S.  C.8  A..V  E.689.  S.  C. 
2  P.  &  F).  510,  S.  C.  1  W.  VV. 
&  H.  673     65,  66,  67,  68,  108,  284, 
286,  377 

10  A.  & 

E  732.  n.  (a)  379 

Martin's    Land  Tax   Com- 

mi.-sioiiers,    1    Term    Reports, 
146  143, 167 

(Parish),  S  B.  &, 

Ad.  907  27] 


R.  V.  Mary  (Parish),  8  Mod.  344. 

S.  C.  Stra.  700  220 
Kensington,  2  B.  &  Ad. 

740  271 
Marylebone   (Pari^h,)  5  A. 

&-  E.  268.  S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  600  52, 
103,  209 
(Vestry),  5  A. 

&  E.  89  223 
St.  Nicholas  (Guardians,)  4 

M.  &.  S.  324      130,  174,  175, 

271 
Pancras  (Parish,)  1  A.  &  E. 

80  74,180.18^270 
3N.  &M. 

425  203 


5  N.  &  M. 


228.  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  535   16.  6.5, 

209,  266,  294,  305,  319,  820,  321, 

323,  337,  328,  327,  339.  37.5,  379, 

380, 402,  403,  409 

9  A.  &  E. 


314.  S.  C.  1  N.  &,  P.  507  6.5,  208, 
209,  266,  267,  319,  326,  327,  363 

379 
7  A.  &  E. 


751.  S.  C.  5  D.  722  218,  392,  397 
9  A.  &  E. 

535  30 
11  A.  &  E. 


15,  27,  n.  (a)   270,  304,  310,  336, 

369 

6  Jur.  391  30, 

313 
2  D.,  N.  S. 


9.57         381,39.5,417,419 

Paul  (Parish,)  1  M.  &  R. 

596  18,  210,  291 

—  Peter's  Coll.,  I  Q.  B.  314   420 

9  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
321,  Q.  B.  77 

(J.),  1  N.  &  M.  108. 


S.  C.  4  Birnwall  &.  Adolphiis, 
342  222, 225 

(Parish,)  5  T.  R. 

364  22, 65 

12  A.  &  E. 


512.     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  253     18,  26, 

61,  114,116.226, 

227,  300 

—  Saviour's  (Churchwardens), 

1  A.  &  E.  380  270 

-(Parish),  7  A.  & 


E.  925.      S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  126 

S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  496       51.  66, 170, 

210,299,317,343,36,3.  373,   377, 

381,416,417, 

419 

Salisbury  (Ep.),  And.  20, 

21  2.56,227 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


xliii 


R.  V.  Sniop     (Chiircliwardens), 
BulI.N.  P.  tit.  "Man."  408 

(J.,)  2  B.  &  A.  694         1-J9 

4  B.  &  A .  8'^6     16, 47, 

2  Barnwall  &  Adol. 

145  210 

3  B.  &  Ad.  910        205 

6  D. 28  219,  306 

3N.  &P.  280.    S. 

C.8A.&E.173  218 
1  G.  &  D.   146. 

S.C.2Q.  B.  85  219 
Sallasl)  ( Mayor),  Raym.  432. 

S.C.Jon.  177  349,370 

Sdway,  9  B.  &  C.  482    37,99, 

183 
Sanchar,  1  Show.  66,67;  2 

Show.  S.  C.  Jon.  121  37,  187, 

188 
Sandwich  (Mayor),  2  Keb. 

92  197 
11   L. 


J.,  N.  S.  132,  Q.  B. 
_  2G.  & 

D.  28.     S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  295  88, 

305 

Sankey,  6  N.  &  M.  839  94 

Sargent,  5  T.  R.  466  413 

Scarborough  (Corporation). 

See  Scarborough's  case,  R.  v. 
Sarborough  (Corp.),  105     331,  332, 

333 

Scawen,  cited  in   Burrow, 

1453  299 

Scott,  1  D.  &  L.  212  381. 

397,  419,  420 

See  R.  V.  Shortridge. 

2  Q  B.  248  97 

Scrivener's    Company,   10 

B.  &  C.  511.     S.  C.  5  M.  &  R. 

543  120,  255,  256 
(Society),  1  G.  & 

D  641  255 

Selby,  2  Show.  154  125 

Serle,  6  Mod.  332,  334         167, 

168,  191,403 
Severn  Railway,  2  B.  &-  A. 

646      11,  18,  19,  20,  24,  25, 27,  GO, 
82,  131,  243,  244 
Sewers     Commissioners, 

Stra.    763.      S.  C.    Ld.    Ray. 

1479  15,  16,  121,  346 

Sharpe,  Gilb.  255  314,  335 

11  Mod.  175  412 

Shaw,  12  Mod.  113         55,  192 

5  T.  R.  549        103,  177 

Sh<'ffi(^Id  Railway,  11  A.  & 

E.  196.    S.  C.  3  P.  &L  D.  Ill     62, 

86 


R.  V.  Shelly,  3  T.  R.  141       161,  162, 

I    4 

Sheppard,  3  T.  R.  381  181, 

182 
Shepton    Mallett     (Over- 
seers), 5  Mod.  421      200,  323,  336, 

380 

Shortridge,  1  D.  &  L.  855. 

S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  70,  M.  C. 
nom.  R.  V.  Scott  128,  231 
Showier,  Burr.  1391  205 

Shropshire,    (J.),-  7    East, 

549  218 

Shrewsbury     (Mayor),     2 

Barn.  394.  S.  C.  Stra.  1051. 
S.  C.  Cas.  t.  Hard.  147.  S.  C. 
W.  Kel.  282.  S.  C.  7  Mod. 
201.     S.  C.  Ridgw.  46.     S.  C. 

14  Vin.  Abr.  588  39,  40,  200, 

201,  202,  203,  342,  347,  352,  354, 

3';  2 

Sillifant,  4  A.  &  E.  354     S. 

5  N.  &  M.  641        15, 67,  231,  234, 
240,  241,  242 

Simms,  4  D.  294  209 

Simmons,  3  Doug.  237  163 

Simpson,  Stra.  609.     S.  C. 

8  Mod.  325.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym. 
1379  70,  71,  72,  187,  189,  194, 

229 

1  Blac.  455     S.  C. 

Burr.  1403  277,  278,  279,  300, 

301 

Slatford,  5  Mod.  317.     S.  C. 

Comb.  419.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  428. 
S.  C.  Burr.  14.52.  S.  C.  Holt, 
438  100,  175.  187,  262,  263, 

264,  321,  3.54,  355 

Slythe,   9   D.   &    R.   229    319, 

386 

Smallpiece,  1  Chilt.  288        95, 

209 

Smith,  Stra.  126  228 

1  M.  &  S.  594,  598 

313,  314,  31.5,  316.  317, 
318,  326 

5  Q.  B.  619.     S.  C. 

1  D.  &  M.  565.  S.  C.  13  L. 
J.,  N.  S.  168,  Q.  B.  201,  202, 

204,  212,  21.3,  379,  386 

Somerset  (Commrs  )  9  East, 

111.     S.  C.  7  East.  70         121,  423 

(J.),   1  N.  &  M. 

252  128 

Somersetsh.  (J.),  Stra.  992 

207, 224 

1  H.  &  W. 

82  133 

4  B.  &  C. 

913  232 


xliv 


TABLE     OF     CASES. 


R.  V.  Somrrpetsli.  (J.),  4  N.  &  M, 

894.     S.  C.  -JA.  &  K.G:i7  241 

. H)  L.  .1.,  N. 

S.  HG.  M.  C  219,2.53 
SdiiilKiiiipton  (J  ),  G  AI.   &, 

S.  891  218,  237 
Sou  til  mol  ton,  (Mayor),  Skin. 

122  119 

Soiiilivvood,     5   M.    &,     R. 

410  150 

Sparrow.   7    Mod.   393.     S. 

C.  Stra.  1123      135,  205,  328,  337, 

403 

Spot  land     (Overseers),     1 

Earn.  137.     S  C.  Cas.  t.  Hard. 
ie4  220.  4:;2.  433,  434 

Sprajrg,    Burr.    999,    1004, 

1005  126 

Stack,  12  L.  J.,  N.   S.  58, 

M.  C.  214 
SiafTord  (J  ),  5  N.  &.  M.  100. 

S  C.  3  A.  &  F>.  425  418 
(MarquiO.  3  T.  R. 

646         4,18,22,20,28,113.114, 
213.200,  411  i 
7  East,  I 

521  157  i 
(Mayor),   2   Kel). 

304  39,  194 
4  T.    R. 

689  127.  334.  397 
(Recorder),  1  P.  &. 

D.  72  103 
Staffordshire,  (J,),  7  T.  R.  81 

133 

3  East,  150    133 

12  East, 

571  91 

6  N.  &  M. 

477.     S.  C.  4  A.  &  E.  844  G7, 

232 
6  A.  &  E. 


90,101.     S.  1^  I  N.  &  P.  277 

10.  52.  103.  147,  2u7,  352 
3  N.  &  P. 

488.     S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  338  128 

1  D.  507       418 

1  D.  484      218. 

236 
2  D.,  N.  S 

353  218, 219 
12  L.  J.,  N. 

S.  9  M.  C.  233 

—  13  L.  J.  N. 
207 

—  16  L.  J..  N. 

S.  53.  M   C.  219,233 

Stainforth  Canal,  1  M.  &  S. 

32  21,  85,  87,  291, 

292 


S.  81.  .\i.  C. 


R.  V.  Stamford  (Mayor),  6  Q.  R 
433  H7,  339 

Stamp   Commissioners,    16 

L.  J..  N   S.  75,  Q.  B.     S  C.  6 

Q.  IJ.  0.57  16.279,  372 

Stanford  (Cnvemors),  1  N. 

&  P.  328.  S.  C.  \V.  VV.  &  I). 
593.  S.  C.  1  Queeri'd  Boiicli, 
130  28, 63 

Starling'.      See  Moneyer's 

case,  and  R.  v.  Sterlinir. 

Steiihowe.   2    Show.    199. 

S.  C.  Skm.  45.  S.  C.  Sir  T. 
Jon.  199  61 

Steward,  4    P.  &    D.  319. 

Siiiiie  Case,  10  L.  J  ,  N.  S.  40, 

M.  C.  00 

Stephens,  Sir  T.  Jon.  177      410 

St^rlincr,    2   Keb.    6.5,  91. 

See  Monever'a  case  and  R.  v. 
Stirling    '  109 

Stevens,    Sir  T.   Jen.  177, 

215  167 

1  Donir.  179  357 

Slirlma,  Say,  174  340,3.53.358 
Stoke,    (liihats.),  2  T.    R. 
541  101 

6  East.  514  232 

Stoke  Damerel  (Minister), 

5  A.  &  E.  58  i.     S.  C.  1  N.  & 
P.  56.     S.  C.  2   H.  &.  W.346 
20,  21,  24,  27,  65,  120,    105,  166, 
181,  182,  208,  257,  258,  270,  284, 
285,  294,  318 

Stratford-upon-Avon  (May- 
or), 1  Lev.  291  5,  109 

Street,  8  Mod.  99  24,  209 

Suffolk  (J.),  6  M.  &  S.  57     110, 

112.  322,  2.33 

1  B.  &  A.  640    220, 

225,  232,  205 

9   D.  &  K.  111. 

S.  C.  6  Burn  wall  &,  Creswell, 
110  10.  133 

•  5N.  &M.  144.  S. 


C.3A.&.E.725.    17.112,220, 

23!>,237.  •<^38,  301,327 
Suffolk  (J  ,),  4  A  &,  E.  319. 

S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  503  218 
6  A.  &  E.  109.  S. 

C.  1  N.  »t  P.  3(16        218,  232,  235 
1  G.  &  D.  140.  S. 

C.  2  Q.  B.  85  217 
16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  30, 

M.  C.  219,  233 

4  Jur.  390  233 

1  D.  103      218,  235, 

236 
Surtreons'   Company.    Burr. 

992.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  534     42,  432 


R.  V.  Snrrev  (J.).  2  Show.  74,  ii. 

(d)  14,  47,  bU,  105.   140,  14:^,   152 
•208,  274,  277,  2U;J 

Siiy.  114  215.  879 

2  13  .rn.  410  104. 1:39 

2  T.  R.  504  50,  2:32 

(j  T.   R.  77  46,  140 

1    Moore    &.     Scott, 

480  218,  232 
5  B  &  A.  539.  S.  C. 

1  D.  &  K.  l?l  129 

• 5  Dowling  &,  Ryland, 

308  41 
7  Dowling  &  Ryland, 

857  133 

5  B.  &  C.  241  1:33 

5  A.  *&  K.  701  103 

1  D  &,  A].  100.  S.  C. 

5  Q  B  500  219 
13  L  J.,  \.  S.  66.  M. 

C.  233,  416 
15  L.  J.,  N.  S.   117, 

M.  C.  2:35,  417 
15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  46,  M. 

C.  S.  C.  3  D.  Sl  L.  573      219,  232, 

233 
(Treasurer)    1  Chit. 

050,  05  ^  25,103,177,280 

Sussex  (J.),  7  T.  R.  107         2H 

7  'J\  K.  280  218 

15  East,   205, 222, 

232 

3  N.  «fe  M.  266    224 

10  A.  «Si,  E.  ()  4. 

S.  C.  3  1'.  &  1).  42  218 
9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  22, 

M.  C.  233 

Swansea  (Corporation)  3^3,  3~5, 

357 
(Harbour),  1   P.  & 

U.  512,  S.  C.  8  A.  (Si,  E.  439        86, 

373 
U  A.  & 


TABLE     OP     CASKS.  xlv 

.  V.  Tiiackwrll,   4   Birnwall    &, 


E.  68 


(Mayor),3P.  &  D. 


10.  S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  17,  Q. 

B.  88 

—  Tappendeii,  3  East,  185         125 

321,  ;358,  407 

Taunton  (Parish),  Covvp.  41:3 

73, 175, 247, 258, 348, 360, 301, 

302 

Taylor,  1  Burn's  Eccl.  Law, 

258  22 

—  Taylor,  2  S;iil<.  451  355 
Taylor,  3  t^alk.  2:30               3,:<y, 

197,  310 

—  'i'hacker,  Sir  T.  Jon.  121         39, 

188 


Cr<'sw.ll,  (\2  2:32 

Thnuios  (Cliiircluvarilfii^), 

Sir.  115         117,175,  170,  199,202, 
247,  :357 

(Cdtntnrs.)  5  A.  &, 

E.815        16,86,:328,:W7,349,412, 

417 

E.  901,  n.(l))  85,  2-5,2^6, 

419,420 

—  Thatcher,  1  D.  «Si  R.  420      14:3, 

188 

—  Thetford  (Church wardons)  5 

T.  R.  304  59,  05,  117 

(Mayor),  6  .Mod  .25 

422 

270  57,  04.  IHO,  325 

Thomas,  3  G.  &  I ).  485.  S  C. 

3Q  B.  5>^9.    S.C.  11  L.  J.,  N. 

S.  295,  Q.  B.  05,  00,  231 

'I'idderley,  1  Sid.  14  5:5,  55 

175,  170,  192,  201, 
264,  401,  402 

Tindall,  6  A.  &  E.  150  120 

Tintagel  (Mayor)  Stra.  100:3, 

1157  184 

—  Tithe  Commissioners,  12  L. 

J.,  N.  S.  109,  Q.  B.  261 

'J'iverton   (Mayor),    8   Mod. 

lw6,  196 

Tod,  Stra.  530       115,  122,  229, 

2:^9,  240 

2  Jur.  565  256 

Todmordeon  (Overseers)   4 

P  &  1).  553   S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  185    210 

3&6 
11    L. 

J.  N.  S.  129,  M.  C.  207 
Tolness  (Mayor)  5  D.  &  R. 

481  38,50,  102.  190,191 
(Union)    7    Q    B. 

690.     S.  C.  14  L.J.,N.S.  148, 

M.  C.  217 

—  Tower,  4  M.  &  S.  1()2     84,  101, 

102,  103 

Hamlets,  1  B.  &  Ad. 

230  121 

3  G.  &  D. 

92.     S.  C.  3  Q  B.  070.     S.  C. 
11  L.  J,N.  S.231,  a  B.       54,84 

121 

—  Townsend,  1  Keb.  45^,  470, 
659.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  91.  S.  C.  1 
Sid.  1('7.     S.  C.  Kay.  69  195 

1  Butt.  305  206 

5  li  &i  A.  421      133 


Traill,  4  P.  &U.  335.    S.C. 


xlvi 


TABLE     OP    CASES. 


12  A.  &  R.  701.  S.  C.  10  L.  J., 
N.  S.  5ri,  M.  C.  142 

R.  V.  Troasiiry  Lord?,  1  A.  «Si  E. 
374.  S.  C.  -J  P.  &  1).  498,  504 

;il,  87,  2G6,  302 

4  A.  &  E. 

286.     S.  C.  5  N.  &  M,  589     12, 18, 
19,28,  113,216,205 

4  A.   &  E. 

970.    S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  505.     S. 

C.  2.  II.  &  W.  67       216,  205,  206 

10  A.  &  E. 

109 
300 
51, 


374.     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  498 
—  Trecolhick,  2  A.  &  E.  405 


241 


Trcpony    (Mayor)    8    Mod, 

111.     S.C.  8Mod.  127      107,313, 
310,  318,  319,  335,  338,  380 

Trinity  Chapel,  8  Mod.  28. 

S.  C.  Stra.  536  42,  125, 

383,  397 

House,  9  D.  505      292 

Truebody,  11    Mod.  75.     S. 

C.  Ld.  Ray  m.  1275.    S.C.Holt. 
449  55,  190.  197,  500,  201 

Truro  (Mayor)  2  CliiU.   257 

120,  165,  194,  197 

2  B.  &  A.  590 

]],  38,47,50,  107,  194,  197,218 

Tucker,  I  Barn   28  379 

3  B  &  C.  545.    S. 

C.  5  1).  &  K.  434       231,  232, 
242,  251,  300,  303,  300,   327, 

336,  337 

Turkey  Company,  Burrow, 

943  126 

Turner,  2  Jon.  215         168,  183, 

332 

1  M.  &  K.  456        155 

Tu  iity,  2  Salk.  4:54.     S.  C. 

7  Mod.  63.     S.C.Holt,  442        70, 

72,73,187,  199,194, 

325,  .■548,401 

Twyford,  5  A.  &  E.  430.    S. 

C.  ON.&M.  836  91,240 

Tvilier,  2  Keb.  250         101,  192, 

193 

Uttoxpler,  1  Bolt.  83.  305      222 

Vicars,  11  Mod.  214  50 

Victoria  Park,  1  Q.  B.  288. 

S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  039         18,  23,  24, 

83,  141,  149, 

109,  305 

Vintners'  Company,  Bull.  N. 

P.  190,  200  186,  293 

\V;.lk.r,  6  .M.  &  S.  277  101 

14  L.  J.,  i\.  S.  120. 

M.  C.    S.  C.  3  D.  &  L.  131       47 


R.  V.  Wall  (Dr.)  11  Mod.  261         212 

Walliiigford  (J.)  Kel,  208     136, 

335 

Wall  is  225. 

Walsall  (Inhabitants)  2  B.  & 

A.  157  205 

Ward,  Gilb.  193  250 

Ward    (Dr.)   1   Barn.  112,  285v 

295,  380,  415.  S.  C.  7  East, 
364,  n.  (b).  S.  C.  Stra.  894,  897, 
S.  C.  Fitz.  193,  194,  195  23,  42,. 
70,  72,  73,  152,  153,  174,  178,  185, 
186,  187,  189,  192,  194,  212,  220, 
229,248,  249,310,313,  317,  319, 
322,  323,  327,  338,  349,  370,  380, 

403 

8  East.  216  249> 

Warn  ford,  5  D.   &  R.  489  62, 

92 

Warren,  Cowp.  370      211,  212, 

213 

Warwick  (Corporation)   10 

A.  &  E.  385.  S.  C.  9  L.  J  ,  N. 
S.  159.  Q.  R  S.  C.  2  P.  & 
D.  429  37,  87,  88 

Warwicksh.    (J.)  2  D.  &  R. 

299  206 

5  B.  &  C. 

430.    S.  C.  8  D.  &  R.  147    92,  205 

5    D.    382 


708 


301,  413,415,42:) 
—  2  A.   &   E. 

91,  237 

6  A.  &  E. 

73.    S.  C.  2  N.  &,  P.  153  218 

6     Q.     B. 


752.     S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  39 
M.  C.  219,  233,  413 

Water     Eaton"   (Manor)    2 

Smith,  54  300,  310,  336 

Watson,  2  Neville   &,  Per- 
ry 595  109 

Watts,  7  Adolphus  &.  Elli.=, 

464  207, 223 

Welbeck    (Inhabs.)     Stra. 

1143  205,370 

Wells  (Corp.)  Burr.  2004 

198,  245,  246  247 
(Mayor)  4  D.  562       280 

VVeobiy,    Stra.     1259    21, 

220,  221, 

\Vest  Looe   (Mayor)  Burr. 

1387  105,  167.  1(H,  184 

3  B  .& 


C.  681.    S.  C.  2D&K.  l-^l.  S 
C.  5  D.  &  R  590        28,  :57,  3^^,  55, 
46,  57,  96,  124,  151,  283,  284,  285, 
287,  290,  292,  294,  3U3,  301,  317, 

414 


TABLE   OF   CASES. 


xlvii 


R.  V.  West,  Looe,  (Mnyor),  5  D. 

&R.  414  DO,  102,  190,  101 
VVeslniinstcr  (Churchward- 
ens (5  A.  &  E.  391  G9 

(Dean)  Comb. 
244.     S.  C.  4  Mod.  281         19,  276 

Westmoreland  (J.)  Say.  282 

231.  232 

Bolt,  734 

230,  237 

1    Wils. 

138  32,  205,  289 

10  B.  & 

C.  226  103 

Westoe  (Churchwardens)  5 

A.  &  E.  789.     !S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
222  17,  84,  95,  209, 

220,  294 

West  Riding  (J.)  3  T.  R.  776 

132 
7   T.   R. 


48  93,320,321,337,339,380 

7  T.  K.  467 

111,  150, 
319,  374 

7  East,  350 

S.  C.  3  £milh,  341  320 

12  East,  116 

103,  294,  412 

3  M.  &  S. 

493  91,  358,  414 

4  ]Vi.  &  S. 

327  218,222,232 

3  D.  &  R. 

306  134,  140 

4  B.  &  Ad. 

685.     is.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  426        133, 
232,  233,  236 
5  B.  &  Ad. 


677.  S.  C.  2  iN.  &  M.  390    14,  232, 

233 
5  B.  &  Ad, 

1003  231,  232 
2  B.   &  C. 

229  131,  137 
4  B.  &.  C. 

678.  S.  C.  1  M.  &  11.  547  313 
1  A.  &   E. 


563  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  802     62,  86, 

239 

2  N.  &  M. 

66,  757.    S.  C.  1  A.  &  E.  606        5, 

20,  137,  232,  233, 

235,  236 

3  P.  «&  D. 

462  218,  232 

4  P.  &  D. 

66S.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  325  48 

1  G.  &  D. 


lOL.  .T.  N.  S.  137,  M.  C.    S,  C. 

11  L.  J.  N.  S  85,  M.  C.      135,  231, 
232,  233,  235,  286,  239,  415 
R.  V.  West  Riding,  2  Q.  B.    331 

231 

2  Q.  B.  505. 

S.  1  G.  &  D.  708.  S.  C.  6  Jnr. 
506.  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  80, 
M.  C.  219,  234,  291 

(Inhabit.'--.)    1 


G.  &  D.  630.   S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  705 

219,  231,  232 
(J  )  5  Q.  B.  1 


S.  C.3G.  &D,170.  S.  C.  1  D. 
&M.590.  S.  C.12L.  J.,N.  S. 
148,  M.C.  111.237,238,239, 

248,  375.  409,  416, 
417,  419 

2  D.  N.  S. 

708  218 

2  D.  &  L. 

488  219 

West  Riding-  (I.)  11  L.  J., 
S.  57,  M.  C.  230 

12  L.  J., 

N.  S.  37M.  C.  2.9 

13  L.  J., 

N.  S.  39,  M.  C.  233 

14  L.  J., 


N.  S.  119,  M.  C.     S.  C.  D.  & 
L.  152  219,  233,  234 

15  L.  J., 

N.  S.  52,  M.  C.  147 

]6  L.  J., 

N.  S.  171,  M.  C.  147,  232,  372 

Weymouth  (Mayor),  7  Q.  B. 

46.     8."  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  353 
Q.  B,  59,  354 

Whaley,  Stra.  1139.     S.  C. 

7   Mod.  308  77,  268,  272,  274, 

304,  335,  336 

—  Wheeler,  3  Keb.  360        49,  64, 

137 

Cas.  t.  Hard.    98, 

199.     S.  C.  Cunn.  1.55  11,18, 

23,  28,  30,  64,  84,94, 172. 193,  250, 

265,  2-15,  293 

1  Barn.  99  50 

1  W.  Bhic.  331       423 


198.    S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  624.    S.  C. 


Wheeiock,  5  Barn.  &.  Cres. 

511  239 

Whiskin,  Andr.  1  356 

-  Whitaker,  9   B.  &  C.   64S 

15,  121 

-  Whitchurch,  2  Barn.  447        94, 

338 

White,  3  Salk.  232.     S.  C. 

6  Mod.  18  nam.  While's  case      60, 

173 
Lord  Raym.  1379.  S. 


xlviii 


TABL  E    OP     CASES. 


C.  8  Mod.  325       GO,  68,  70,  71 ,  72, 

229 
R.  V.  Whitp,  4  T.  R.  771  222 

VVhitrnnl  (.Manor)   1   Q   B. 

8.'j5.     y.  C.  7  1).  7U9  158,  159, 

104 

Whitloy  (Inhabs.)  11  A.  &. 

E.  90  218 

Whifstnbic  Fishery,  7  East, 

35.5.     S.  C.  3  Smiih.319       20,22, 

53,  126.  192,  277 

Wifran  (Corp)  Burr.  7«2.  S. 

C.  L<1.  Kun.  584.    See  R  v.  Ol- 
lerhead  184,313,331,332 

f W  ijjan  (Mayor),  Burr.  1643 

"  313,363, 

365,  36-5 

I  Sid.  92        39. 

297 

VVildinan,  Strn.  879.     S.  C. 

1  Birii.  41)2,405,  nom.    R.  v. 
Wibc-tnnn,  49,  52,  ^4,  306,  310, 

324,  335 

VViikinfon  (Cliiirchwardeiis) 

1     Runi.  227  220 

Williams,  Say.  140        181,  1H2, 

225,  373 

Bnrr.  402,  40:3         439 

Burr.  1317  41 

a  B.  &,  C.  6-^1.    S. 

C.  3  M.  &  R.  402        70,  71,  72,  73, 

348,  349,  3.')0,  363, 

373,  428 

Willingford  (J.)  2  Barn  132 

33fi,  337,  338 

Willis,  Andr.  279.     S.  C.  7 

Mod.  261  149,  150,  166,  168, 

1-4,  29, 

Willie,  3  B.  &  A.  510  157 

VViLson,  5  D.  &  K.  602  65 

\Vils„ii,  lOB.  &  C.  80.     S. 

C.  5  M.  &  II.  140         1.53,  155,  156 

3  N.  &  M.  753  62 

5  N.  &  i\I.  119  224 

VVillon  (.Mayor), 5  .Mod. 2.57. 

S.  I  .  2  Salk.  42S.    S.  C.   Ld. 
H  ay  in.  225         53,  5.5,  1 97,  1 99,  200, 
202,  3  3,  304,  355 

4  D.  562  108, 

109 

\V  ills.  Canal,  8  D.  623      85, 2-5 

286 
5  N.  &  M.  348, 


459.     .S.  C.  3  Adolphus   &,  El- 
lis 4-3  19 
46,  s2,  s~3.  >^4.  177,  284,  2^5,  2^6 

(J.).   Burr.  1530.     S. 

C.  1  VV.  Biac.  467  33 

1  East,  683   218, 232 


R.  V.  Wilts.  Canal,  10  East,  404     14, 
218,  233 

13  East,  352         10, 

137 

2  Chit.  257   231,236 

8  B.  &  C.  380. 

S.  C.  2  M.  &L  R  401  22 ',233 

8  L).  717.     S.  C. 

4  Ju  r.  460    1 32, 1 36,  234,  21 2, 305 

Win.  2  Keb.  73-i.  S.  C.  nom. 

R.  V.    Marches    (President)    1 
■    Lev.  306.     y.  C.  1  Vent.  110, 
111.     See  R.  V.  Ciapham,  178, 

309,  321 

Winchelsea  (Corp.),  2  Lev. 

85  290 

Winche.ster  (Ep.),   7    East, 

573  71, 412 

(Mayor),  7  A.  &. 


E.  220.     S.  C.  2  a'.  &l  F.  274. 

S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  525.     S.  C. 

1  Jur.  738  26,  27,  99,  100,  305 

Windham,  Stra   ^79  98 

Winter,  2  Keb.  134  256 

Winton.  5  T.  R.  fe9  422 

VVisiow,  1  Gale  &.  Davison, 

681  235 
Wilhan)   Savings'   Bank,  3 

N.  &  M.  416.    S.  C.  \  .\.6i  E. 
321  128,  2.52,  289 
VVix  (Inhabs  )  2  B.  &  Atl. 

197        69,  317,  318,  33(),  319.  416, 
419,421,422 

Woodman,  4  B  &  A.  507       271 

Wood  row,  2  T.  R.  732  46 

57,  92,  16.5,  1S(\  253 
— ■- —  Woods,  &,c.  (Coiiiciirs.)   fcee 

Ex  parte  Reeve. 
Worcester  (Canal),  1  .M.  & 

R.  533  18.  2-,  ^3.  305 
Worcester  (Ep.),  4  M.  &l  S. 

415  63,  .i74,  275 

(J  ),  7  D.  7^9  245 

(Muyor\    ("as.    t. 

Hard.  123,  n   (0        '  221 
Worcester--,h.   (J.),    1    Chit. 

649  2  i3,  237 
5  .M.  &  S. 

4.57  207,  222 


228 


209 


2  B.  &,  A. 

13.<,  418 

3  I).  &L  l{. 

74.  206 

9  D.  &  U. 

137.  230 

12  A.  &L  !■•. 

2S.  S.  C  3  P.  <fe.  D.  465.  >.  C. 
9  L.  J  ,  :\.  S.  tl,  M.  C.  S  C. 
4  Jur.  1009  205 


::.;il 


TABLE    OF     CASES. 


xlix 


R.  V.  Worcestersh,  (J.),  4  P.  &  D. 

440.     S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  13, 

M.C. 
Wrexham  (Churchwardens), 

15  Vin.  Abr.  214,  pi.  6. 
Roads,  5  A.  «Si  E. 

581 


224 


136 

67 


Wriothesley,  1  B.  &  Ad.  648 

Wyndham,  Cowp.  378    5,  9,  10, 

12,  18,  78,  80,  96,  193 

Yarborough  (Ld.),  12  A.  & 

E.  416.     S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  491      222 

York  (Archbp.),  6  T.  R.  490 

254, 297,  360,  870 

(J.),  3  T.  R.  150  218 

4  B.  &  Ad.  342. 

S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  108         16,  18,  20 

2  B.  &  C.  771       103, 

218,  232 

1  A.  &  E.  828. 

S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  685  ^     31,  86 

(Mayor),  4  T.  R.  699         27, 

90,  106,  180,  182,  188,  245,   246, 

303 
5  T.  R.  66,  72      187, 


1 89, 194, 246, 309, 318, 336, 338, 339, 

349, 350, 351, 356, 357, 360, 361, 362, 

370,  371,  374,  379,  384,  402 

6  East,  360,  n.  (d)  245 

8  D.  502  88 

3  Q.  B.  550.  S.  C. 

2  G.  &  D.  605.  S.  C.  11  L.  J., 
N.  S.  246,  Q.  B.  S.  C  2  Jur. 
1082  88,  191,  386,  397 

(Railway),  14  L.  J.,  N. 

S.  277,  Q.  B.  30,  195,  244 

(Recorder),  4  D.  &  L. 

376.     S.  C.  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  22, 

M.  C.  147 

(Sheriffs),  2  Show,  1-54    44, 

187,  189,  194 

3B.&Ad.775    44, 

191 
R.  V.  Yorkshire  (Inhabs.),  7  East, 
355,  n.  (a)  192 

(J.),  1  Doug.  193  218 

Yonge,  5  M.  &  S.  120  280 

. Young,  Burr.  561  41 

keynall's  case,  9  Rep.  99  198 

Rich  V.  Pilkington.Carth.  171       426, 

428,  430 
Richards  v.  Dyke,  3  Q.  B.  267  19 
Right  V.  Banks,  3  B.  &  Ad.  668  155 
Rioter's  case,  1  Vern.  195  105,  112 
Robert's  (Dr.)  case,  2  Show.  170. 
S.  C.  2  Keb.  102,  364        49,  77, 78, 

212 
Robinson  v.  Grosscourt,  5  Mod.  105 

126 
Robotham  v.  Trever,  2  Brownl.  11  211 
April,  1852.— 4 


Roe  V.  Aylman,  Barnes,  321, 236, 

237  161 
Roger's  case,  T.  18,  C.  1  125 
V.  Jones,  5  D.  &-  R.  484      158, 

162,  163 
Ruding  V.  Newell,  Stra.  983    194.249, 

406,  432 
Russell  V.  Succlin,  1  Sid.  218        431 


S. 


Sabine's  case.     See  Savill's  case. 
St.  Alban's  v.  St.  Botolph's,  11  Mod. 
206  220 

—  Balaunce's  case  (Parish),  Palm. 
51.  S.  C.  2  Roll.  106        30, 70, 104, 

106,  108,  176 

—  Burien's  case  35,  89,  277 

—  David's  (Ep.)  v.  Lacy,  Ld.  Raym. 
544  107, 397 

—  Dunstan's  Clerk's  case,  Comb. 
105  212 

—  Ives'  (Borough)  case,  Bull.  N.  P. 
195  414 

—  John's  Coll.  V.  Todington,  Burr. 
195.     S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  71  78 

—  Luke's  V.  Middlesex  (J.),  1  Wils. 
133  224 

—  Paul's  (Dean)  case,  Noy.  69  276 
Sand's  case,  1  Sid.  179  35,  279 
Sandays  v.  Sandays,  1  Q.  B.  316  412 
Sanders  v.  Owen,  5  Mod.  387.     S. 

C.  Carth.426.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  467. 
S.  C.  Hob.  190.  S.  C.  Comb. 
317.     See  Owen  V.  Saunders      215 

Sandwich  (Mayor)  v.  R ,  16  L. 

J.,  N.  S.  432,  Q-gB.  88 

Savill's  case,  2  Keb.  610.     S.  C. 
nom.  Sabine's  case,  1  Sid.  443    22, 

280 

Sayer  v.  Newton  106 

Scales  V.  Key,  3  P.  &  D.  505        431 

Scarborough's  case,  Stra.  1180,  or 

R.  V.  Scarborough  (Corp.)       45,  46, 

57,  62,  92,  165,  180,  181,  183,  258, 

325 

Schriven  v.  Turner,  Stra.  832       174, 

186,  280,  281 

Scriveners'  Company  v.  R ,  3 

G.  &  D.  272.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  939  255 
Severn's  (River),  case.  Comb.  347  256 
Shalmer   v.   Pulteney,  Ld.  Ray. 

277  171 

Sharp  v.  London  (City),  Gilb.  259  403 
Sherry  v.  Oke,  3  D.  394  295 

Sherlock  (Dr.)  v.  Norwich  (Dean), 

Fort.  222  201,  226 

Shuttleworthv.  Lincoln  (Corp.),  2 
Bulst.  122      5, 38, 39, 185, 190, 1 91 


TABLE     OF    CASES, 


Smith's  case,  Carth.  217.    S.  C.  4 

Mod.  52.  S.  C.  1  Show.  263, 274. 

S.C.  12  Mod.  17.  S.C.  Holt,  168, 
310.    S.  C.  Skin.  293,  310      39,187, 

190 
Stra.  892.       S.  C. 

Anon.,  1  Barn.  370,  425,    S.  C. 

Andr.  24  '  34, 35 
V.  Armourers'  Company, 

Peake,  N.  P.  Cas.  109         126,  389 
V.  Andover  (Bailiffs),  Barn. 

159  110 

V.  Aykwell,  3  Atk.  566         83 

V.  Davis,  1  Wils.  104    163, 164 

Snag  V.  Fox,  Palm.  342  159 

Snook  V.  Mattock,  5  A.  &  E.  239 

159,  396,  411,  412 

V.  Southwood,  R.  &  M.  429    3S9 

Soane  v.  Ireland,  10  East,  2.59  431 

Southampton  (Mayor)  v.  Graves, 

8  T.  R.  590  84,  94,  95,  147 

South  Cadbury  v.  Braddon,  2  Salk. 

607  238, 239 

Sparke  v.  Denne,  Sir  T.  Jon.  225  33 
Sprathursts'  case,  Hob.  101  1 

Speak  q.  t.  v.  Brown,  2  Barn.  53  211 
Speaker  v.  Styant,  Comb.  127  152 
Specott's  case,  5  Rep.  57  144,  199 
Stamp's  case,  Raym.  12  S.  C.  1  Sid. 

40.     S.  C.  1  Keb.  5      38,  53,  89,  99, 

151, 152, 153, 165, 173, 174, 176, 211, 

253,  255,  262,  263 

Stanton's  case,  Moor,  135,  833      196, 

201 
Sterling  al  Monier's  case,  1  Sid.  304. 

S.  C.  2  Keb.  91  169,  330 

Stevens  v.  Evans,  Burr.  1157  19 

Stevenson  v.  Newenson,  Ld.  Raym. 

1353  389 

Steward's  case.  Comb.  127  153 

Steward  v.  Eddy,  7  Mod.  143  33,  34, 35 
Stoughton  V.  Reynolds,  Cas.  t.  Hard. 

274.    S.  C.  Fort.  168.      S.  C. 

Stra.  1045  70 

Stutter  V.  Freston,  Stra.  52  68,  69 
Subdeany  v.  Chichester  (Mayor) 

3  Keb.  572,  594  221,  222 

Suffolk's  Case  (Ld.)  Cas.  t.  Hard. 

8.     S.  C.  2  Keb.  156,  pi.  128        33 
Suro^eons'  Company's  case,  1  Salk. 

374  432,  433,  434, 

Sutton  Vallance's  case  71 

Symmers  v.  Regem,  Cowp.  502     101, 

167,  168,  188, 199,  201,  203 


T. 


Talbutt  v.  Villebois  162 

Tarrant  v.  Haxby,  Burr.  367    212,  213 
Tatler  v.  Reynolds,  2  Barn.  365     255 


Taverner's  case,  Ray.  446     126, 146, 

317 

Tawney's  case,  2  Salk.  531.  S.  C. 

Ld.  Raym.  1009.    S.  C.  6  Mod. 

98  323, 337 

Taylor's  case,  Poph.  133  3,  39,  55 
Taylor  v.  Gloucester  (City),  1  Roll, 

409.     S.  C.  1  Bulst.  189.     S.  C. 

2  Show.  204.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  2.30  313, 
315,  316,  338,  380 
Tey's  case,  5  Rep.  39  106 

Thctford's  case  (Mayor)  6  Mod.  25. 

S.  C.  2  Salk.  429  345 
1  Salk.  192. 

S.  C.   3  Salk.  104.    S.  C.   Ld. 

Raym.  848.  S.  C.  Holt.  171       347, 
364,  430 
Thompson's  case  245 

Thompson  v.  Goodfellow,  2  Show. 

173  2.59 
V.  Edmunds,  2  Roll.  Abr. 

4.56  2,  46,  99,  326,  333 

Thome  v.  Woollcombe,  4  B.  &-  Ad. 

592.    S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  406  85 

Thursfield  v.  Jones,  1  Vent.  367  65 
Tiping  V.  Bunning,  Moor.  465  160 
Townsend's  case,  1  Lev.  91.  S.  O. 

1  Sid.  107.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  4.58,  &c. 

S.  C.  Raym.  69     58,  125,  136,  1-39, 
164,  165,  256,  357,  358 
Tremain's  case.  Comb.  1.58  35 

Trevaignon's  case.  Comb.  203  139 
Trevor  v.  Trevor,  1  P.  Wms.  628  146 
Trinity   Chap.    (Dean)   v.   Dublin 

(Archbp.)  8  Mod.  183  273 

Trott's  case,  2  Keb.  693  49 

Truro's  case  (Mayor)  2  Chit.  257  186, 

188,  298 
Tufton  v.  Nevinson,  Ld.  Raym.  1354 

431 
Turton  v.  Reynolds,  12  Mod.  433  145 


U. 


Underbill's  case,  1  Keb.  397  44 

Underbill  v.  Ellicombe,  Mel.  &  You. 

394  224 

Underwood's  case  45 

Urling  V.  R.,  Fort.  198  110 

Usher's  case,  5  Mod.  4.52  78, 273, 274, 

.      275 


Vaughan  v.  Gunmakers'  Company, 
6  Mod.  82.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  989 

1.30 

Vaughan  v.  Lewis,  Carth.  227        46, 

389,  430,  431 


TABLE     OP     CASES. 


li 


Veal's  Case,  Raym.  431  168,  401 

Verrior  v.  JSandvvicli  (Corp.)2Keb. 

92  2m 

Vincent's  ca?e  23 

Vincent  v.  London  (Ep.)  143 

W. 

Waggoner's  case,  8  Rep.  122  115,  353 
Walker's  case  (Dr.)  Cas.  t.  Ld.  Hard. 

214    39,  93, 105, 106, 107,  110,  111, 

171, 268, 273, 274, 275, 328, 337,  402 

Andr.  178  328 

Walker  v.  London  Railway — see 

R.  V.  Middlesex, 
V.  Woolaston,  2  P.  Wms. 

576,  589.  S.  C.  Stra.  917.  S.  C. 

Fitz.  202.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  423,  467  35 
Waniner's  case,  15  Car.    S,  C.  1 

Keb.  521  71 

Ward  V.  Brampston,  3  Lev.  362. 

S.  C.  1  Danvers,  6.  S.  C.  2  Wms. 

Saund.  116  71,  429,  430 

Warden  v.  Rous,  7  Mod.  323  100 

Warner's   case — see  Lee's  (Dr.) 

case. 

V.  Giles,  Stra.  954  94 

Warren'scase,  2Rol].  112.   S.  C. 

Cro.  Jac.  540        39,  101,  175,  176, 
199,  264 
Watkins  v.  Edwards,  1  Mod.  287 

264 
Weller  v.  Baker,  2  Wils.  414  429 
Welsh  V.  Bichards,  Barnes,  468  228 
Whitacre's  case  (Scrjt.)  Str.  674. 

S.  C.  Holt.  445,  446.     S.  C.  11 

Mod.  67.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  434.  S.  C. 

Ld.  Raym.  433, 1233, 1283.  S.  C. 

1  Barn.  295  176,  198,  246,  247, 

314,  318,  319,  408 
Whitechurch  v.  Padget,  Sty.  208  116 
White's  case,  6  Mod.  18.     S.  C. 

3  Salk.  233.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym. 

1004         43, 84,  174,  229,  249,  337, 

356 
White  V.  Itving,  2  M.  &  W.  127  414 


Whitelegg  v.  Richards.  3  B.  &,B. 

188.     S.  C.  2  B.  &C.  45  115 

Whit  wood  V.  JocHMi  336 

Widdowf-on  v.  Ilarrinirtcr),  1  Jac. 

&  Walk.  542  ^  1.57 

Widrington'8  cjise,  Ravm.  81,  68. 

S.  C.  1  Sid.  71.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  23. 

S.  C.  1  Keb.  2,  50,  61,  79  122, 131, 

151,  234, 4.58        2,  78, 79,  139, 170. 

255, 268, 269,  272, 274, 30.3, 314, 318, 
319,  333,  366,  367,  3G8,  432 
Wigan's  case  (Rector)  Stra.  1207. 

S.  C.  Wils.  70  57,14^ 
Wigan  V.  Holmes,  Say.  110  297 
(Town)  V.  Pilkington,  1  Keb. 

597  38,  40 

Wilkins  V.  Mitchell,  3  Salk.  229. 

S.  C.  Ld,  Raym.  340         18,  22,  23 

110,  111 

Williams  case,  2  Keb.  558  101 

V.  Gwyn,  2  Saund.  46      100 

Lonsdale  (Lord)  3  Ves. 

Junr.  752  154 

Willis  V.  Rich,  2  Atk.  285  35 

Wilsford    V.    Doncaster    (Mayor) 

Burr.  738  375 

Wilson  V.  Hoare,  4  A.  &  E.239  155 
Witherington  V.  Christ's  College,  1 

Sid.  71  227 

Witiinell  V.  Gartharo,  0  T,  R,  358  253 
Wood  V.  Whitcomb  162 

Woods  V.  Reid,  2  M.  &  W.  777  51 
Woollaston  v.  Walker,  Fitz.  202  277 
Woolverton's  case,  P.  2  Edw.  2  77,  78 

269 
Wormwell  v.  Hailstone,  6  Bing. 

676  83.  169 
Wright  V.  Fawcett,  Burr.  2041  13, 
126,  127,351,360,361,302 
V.  Sharp,  11  Mod.  175.   S, 

C.  Salk.  228.     S.  C.  Holt.  301   402, 

4U9 
Y. 

Yates'  case.  Sty.  477,  479  196 

York  Railway  v.  Milner,  15  L.  J  , 
N.  S.  379,  Q.  B.  327, 399 


TABLE   OF    THE   STATUTES 


CITED  IN  THIS  VOLUME. 


The  pages  referred  to  are  those  between  brackets.  [ 


]• 


17  Rich.  2,  c.  9 
8  Hen.  6,  c.  9 

21  Hen.  8,  c.  5 
37  Hen.  8  c.  1 

43  Eliz.  c.  2  GO,  206,  207, 
1  Jac.  1,  c.  6 

12  Car.  1,  c.  24 
16  Car.  1,  c.  4 

13  Car.  2,  c.  1      166, 
13  Car.  2,  c.  2 

13  &  14  Car.  2 

13  &  14  Car.  2,  c.  12 

15  Car.  2,  c.  17 

22  Car.  2,  c.  1 
22  &  23  Car.  2 

22  &  23  Car.  2,  c.  10 

23  Car.  2 

25  Car.  2,  c.  2 
1  Wm.  &  M.  c.  8 
1  Wm.  &  M.  21 

1  Wm.  &  M.  St.  1,  c.  18 

2  Wm.  &  M.  St.  1,  c.  8 

2  Wm.  &  M.  St.  2,  e.  37 

3  &  4  Wm.  &  M.  c.  12 
5  &  6  Wm.  &  M.  c.  10 

8  &  9  Wm.  3,  c.  37 

4  Ann.  c.  16        334, 

9  Ann.  c.  20   6,  7,  45,  53 

166,  167,  168,  173,  179, 
333,  334,  344,  345,  340, 
369,  370,  371,  372,  375, 
385,  386,  387,  388,  389, 
395,  396,  397,  398,  400, 
410,  411,412,  415,  419, 
428,  432,  439,  440,  444 

10  Ann.  c.  11 

1  Geo.  1,  c.  34 

1  Geo.  1,  St.  2,  c.  13 

5  Geo.  1,  c.  6 

6  Geo.  l,c.  6 
6  Geo.  1,  c.  21 


108 
124 
42,  277,  279 
214 
220,  222,  271 
275 
1 
275 
187,  263,  355 
55 
144 
289 
21,  48,  120 
119 
66 
36 
100 
188 
80 
214,  215,  371 
119,  262 
187, 188 
253 
136,  253 
100 
253 
369,  389,  395 
,  93,  127,  165, 
225,  296,302, 
353,  354,  364, 
376,383,  384, 
392,393,  394, 
402,  404,  406, 
425,  426,  427, 
,  446,  451,  454 
65 
90 
440 
166,  188 
253 
115 


11  Geo,  1,  c.  4    37,  45,  57,  62,  92,  93 

99,  101,  148,  150,  150  n.  (w),    165, 

166,  179,  180,  181,  184,  188,  299,  331, 

344,  422,  439,  442,  450 

11  Geo.  1  c.  18  31 

11  Geo.  1,  s.  2,  c.  13    77,80,165,188 

2  Geo.  2,  c.  22  139,  140 

2  Geo.  2,  c.  23  44 

2  Geo.  2,  c.  29  274 

6  Geo.  2,  c.  27  44 

11  Geo.  2,0.19  142 

12  Geo.  2,  c.  28  129 
12  Geo.  2,  c.  29  63,91,102 
17  Geo.  2,  c.  3  223 
17  Geo.  2,  c.  38  74,  206,  207,  209 
17  Geo.  2,  c.  50  90 
18Geo.  2,c.  33  253 
19  Geo.  2,  c.  12  (I.)  165,  166,  167,  168, 

173,  179,  180,  181,  183,  255,  256,  296, 

333,  334,  342,  344,  349,  353,  370,  371, 

376,  383,  384,  385,  386,  387,  388,  392, 

394,  395,  397,  398,  400,  404,  410,  412, 

413,  415,  419,  425,  454 

22  Geo.  2,  c.  83  223 

25  Geo.  2,  c.  29  92,  93 

12  Geo.  3,  c.  21   55,  74,  124,  125,  127, 

177,  444 

13  Geo.  3,  c.  48  136 

13  Geo.  3,  c.  78  134 

14  Geo.  3,  c.  78  20,  53,  92 

17  Geo.  3,  c.  106  132 

18  Geo.  3,  c.  25  90 
22  Geo.  3,  c.  83  170,  209 
25Geo.  3,  c.  4  143 
31  Geo.  3,  c.  32               188 

33  Geo.  3,  c.  54  128 

34  Geo.  3,  c.  68  259 

34  Geo.  3,  c.  69  140 

35  Geo.  3,  c.  101  218 
35  Geo.  3,  c.  106  85 
37  Geo.  3,  c.  143              276 


Iv 


TABLE     OP     STATUTES. 


38  Geo.  3,  c.  52  388,  445 

38  Geo.  3,  c.  54,  s.  4  123 

41  Geo.  3,  c.  23  225 

43  Geo.  3,  c.  64  400 

43  (Jeo.  3,  c.  110  170 

44  Geo.  3,  c.  108  140 
49  Geo.  3,  c.  40  130 

49  Geo.  3,  c.  68  47 

50  Geo.  3.  c.  48  61 
50  Geo.  3,  c.  49          74,  206,  207 

52  Geo.  3,  c.  93  129 

53  Geo.  3,  c.  127  67 
55  Geo.  3,  c.  50  89 

55  Geo.  3,  c.  68  133 

56  Geo.  3,  c.  65  66 

57  Geo.  3,  c.  19  251 

57  Geo.  3,  c.  29  52 

58  Geo.  3,  c.  45  68 

59  Geo.  3  134 
59  Geo.  3,  c.  12  270 
59  Geo.  3,  c.  134  68 
3  Geo.  4,  c.  23  53,  92 
3  Geo.  4,  c.  33  251 
3  Geo.  4,  c.  113            215,  216 

3  Geo,  4,0.126  132 

4  Geo.  4,  c.  05  131,  136 

4  Geo.  4,  c.  119  139 

5  Geo.  4,  c.  83  48 
7  Geo.  4,  c.  64  98,  104 
7  &  8  Geo.  4,  c.  29  123 
7  &  8  Geo.  4,  c.  31  250 
9  Geo.  4  c.  15  390 
9  Geo.  4,  c.  40  63 
9  Geo.  4,  c.  61                 41 

9  Geo.  4,  c.  92  252 

10  Geo.  4,  c.  6  128 
10  Geo.  4,  c.  50         113,  157,  158 

10  Geo.  4,  c.  56  128,  252 

11  Geo.  4  &  1  "Wm.  4,  c.  GO  22,  159 
11  Geo.  4  &  1  Wm.  4,  c.  70  296 
1  Wm.  4,  c.  21   6,  7,  25,  173,  235,  240 

289,  299,  302,  306,  307,  313,  333,  334 
341,  342,  344,  345,  349,  371,  377,  381 
382,  384,  385,  386,  387,  388,  389,  392 
393,  394,  395,  396,  397,  398,  400,  402 
404,  408,  411,  412,  415,  416,  418,  419 
422,  425,  428,  446,  448,  449,  452,  457 
1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  58  343,  411,  447,  448, 

457 


1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  60 

2  Wm.  4,  c.  45 

3  &  4  Wm.  4,  c.  27 

3  &  4  Wm.  4,  c.  42 

4  &  5  Wm.  4,  c.  40 

4  &  5  Wm.  4,  c.  76 

5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  50 
5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  03 
5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  76 

62,  87,  88,  94,  99, 


6  &  7  Wm.  4,  c.  71 

6  &  7  Wra.  4,  c.  85 
6  &  7  Wra.  4.  c.  96 

6  &  7  Wm.  4,  0.  114 

7  Wm.  4  and  1  Vict.  c. 
58,  59,93,  99,  101,  165,  166,  179,  180, 

184,  442,  450 


270,  321,  327 

58 

157 

390,  411 

128,  252 

47,  48,  63,  141, 

207,  209 

98,  132,  135 

276 

37,  50,  51,  58, 

100,  145,  179,  213, 

276,  289,  339,  450 

261 

248 

210,  222 

'  228 

37,  45,  57, 


78 


1  &  2  Vict.  c.  110 

2  &  3  Vict.  c.  85 
4  &  5  Vict.  c.  34 

4  &  5  Vict.  c.  59 

5  &  6  Vict.  c.  5 
5  &  6  Vict.  c.  22 

5  &  6  Vict.  c.  Ill 

6  Vict.  c.  20 

6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67 


216 

48 

415 

136 

133 

228 

87,  141 

389 

7,  17,  43,  51,  67,  91, 

98,  119,  123,  128,  134,  142,  207,  210, 

224,  231,  240,  241,  242,  296,  372,  375, 

376,  377,  380,  381,  396,  398,  399,  400, 

401,  405,  415,  446,  451,  460 

6  &  7  Vict.  c.  86  248 

6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89     38,  45,  46,  50,  51, 

55,  56,  57,  58,  59,  62,  74,  81,  92,  99, 

127,  141,146,  165,  167,  180,  183,  184, 

256,  262,  287,  298,  407,  453 

6  &  7  Vict.  c.  90  255 

7  &  8  Vict.  c.  101  47,  48 

7  &  8  Vict.  c.  110  82 

8  Vict.  c.  10  47 

9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113  (I.)  173,  183, 
210,  224,  231,  240,  241,  242,  289,  299, 
302.  306,  307,  313,  333,  334,  341,  342, 
343J344,  349,  371,  372,  375,  376,  377, 
380,  381,  383,  384,  385,  387,  388,  392, 
393,  394,  395,  396,  397,  398,  400,  401, 
404,  405,  408,411,  415,  416,  419,  425, 

426,  428,  458 


^^ofe. — Cases  cited  to  wliich  a  dagger,  f  is  annexed  are  inserted  in  the  English 
Common  Law  Reports,  Philadelphia  Edition.  Those  to  which  a  star  *  is  annexed, 
have  been  reported  in  the  recent  decisions  of  the  Court  of  Exchequer,  Edited  by 
Messrs.  Hare  and  Wallace. 

T.  .1-  J.  W.  JOHNSON. 


THE 

LAW   AND  PEACTICE 

OF    TUE 

Big^  ^^rnngatiuf 
WHIT  OF  MANDAMUS. 


CHAPTER    THE    FIRST. 

OF   THE    ORIGIN   AND    HISTORY    OP    THE   HIGH    PREROGATIVE   WRIT   OF 

MANDAMUS. 

The  Writ,  the  subject  of  this  Treatise,  has,  since  its  institution  as  a 
legal  formula,  become  so  changed  and  amplified,  both  in  form  and 
efiicacy,  that  some  have  been  induced  to  consider  it  to  be  of  almost 
modern  establishment;  whereas  the  truth  is,  that  so  early  as  the  thir- 
teenth century,  it  was  but  a  species  of  that  ancient  and  extensive,  but 
now  obsolete  class  of  writs,  whose  generic  name  was  "  mandamus," (a) 

[a)  The  term  "  mandamus  "  is  to  be  found  in  a  great  yariety  of  ancient  writs, 
privy  seals,  &c.  (see  App.  Forms  B.  0.  and  D.,)  totally  different  from  the  modern 
writ,  which  for  the  sake  of  distinction  was  usually  called  a  special  mandamus^  R.  v. 
Dr.  Gower,  3  Salk.  230.  Among  the  several  species  of  ancient  writs  of  mandamus 
were  the  following : 

1st.  A  writ  that  lay  on  the  death  of  one  of  the  king's  tenants  to  inquire  of  wliat 
lands  he  had  died  seised  ;  it  was  granted  after  the  year  and  day,  when  in  the 
meantime  the  writ  called  diem  clausit  extremum  had  not  been  sent  out  to  the 
escheator,  Spathurst's  case.  Hob.  101 ;  Fitz.  N.  B.  fol.  253  b,  561.  See  stat.  12 
Car.  1,  c.  24  ;  Dyer.  ITO  a,  209. 

2nd.  A  writ,  in  the  nature  of  a  charge  to  the  sheriff,  to  take  into  the  king's 
hands  all  the  lands  and  tenements  of  the  king's  widow,  who,  against  her  oath  for- 
mally given,  married  without  the  king's  consent,  Reg.  fol.  195  b  ;  Blount's  Die. 
tit.  "  Man. ;  "  Termes  de  la  Ley,  tit  "  Man.]  "  Toml.  Law  Diet.  tit.  "  Man." 

As  to  a  royal  mandamus  for  the  granting  of  academical  degrees,  &c.,  see  R.  v. 
Cambridge  (U.,)  Burr.  1G51. 

As  to  a  mandamus  from  Chancery,  see  Mayor  of  Coventry's  case,  2  Salk.  429. 


56  tapping's    mandamus. 

but  which  writ,  on  account  of  its  pre-eminence  and  gradual  development 
*during  centuries  of  judicial  nurture,  ultimately  became,  and  is 
^       -•  now  known  to  us  by  the  appellation  of  "  The  II'kjIi  Prerogative 
Writ  of  3Ia7idamns." (I)) 

At  so  early  a  period  of  our  legal  history  did  this  writ  exist  as  an 
instrument  or  means  whereby  various  public  duties  and  powers  were  com- 
manded and  enforced,  that  the  exact  date  of  its  institution  cannot,  with 
any  accuracy,  bo  shewn.  An  attentive  consideration,  however,  of  its  gen- 
eral character,  and  of  the  principles  upon  which  it  is  founded,  namely, 
those  of  the  common  law,(r)  shews  that  its  origin  may  be  safely  referred 
to  that  clause  of  the  Magna  Charta,  which  declares  that  "  nulli  negabi- 
mus  aut  differemus  justitiam  vol  rectum. "(f?) 

Many  instances  are  recorded  of  the  writ  having  issued  so  early  as  the 
reigns  of  Edw.  2,  and  Edw.  3,  and  Lord  Mansfield,  in  an  elaborate  judg- 
ment,((^)  while  descanting  upon  this  point,  states,  that  in  a  manuscript 
book  of  reports  which  he  had  seen,  the  reporter  in  reporting  Dr.  Bon- 
ham's  case,  cites  the  case  of  a  mandamus  temp.  Edw.  3,  directed  to  the 
University  of  Oxford,  commanding  the  restoration  of  one  upon  whom 
the  sentence  of  "bannitus"  had  been  passed. (/)  So  that  it  is  not  true 
that  the  writ  was  first  used  so  lately  as  the  reign  of  James  1,  in  a  case 
called  Bagg's  case  }(g)  probably,  however,  Bagg's  case  was  merely  the 
first  writ,  in  its  judicial  form,  which  had  reference  to  municipal  corpora- 
tions, for  it  was  not  till  long  afterwards,  namely,  an.  12  Wm.  3,  that 
such  writs  were  entered  of  record ;  at  which  time  a  rule  of  Court  was 
promulgated,  that  they  should  be  so  entered  of  the  same  Term  they  came 
in.(/0 

In  the  Cottonian    Manuscriptsfi)  also,  and  in  those  valuable 

C*3  1  ... 

-'  repertoria  of  historical  facts  and  judicial  proceedings,  made  acces- 
sible to  all  by  the  learned  labours,  among  others,  of  Rymer,  Madox,  Pal- 
grave,  and  Nicholas,  we  find  many  and  distinct  evidences  of  its  existence 

{h)  See  meaning  of  "  Prerog.ative,"  post,  p.  4,  n.  (a.) 

(c)  R.  V.  Bosworth,  Stra.  1113. 

\d)  10  Mod.  53. 

\e)  Dr.  Askew's  case,  Burr.  2190.  In  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  Fort.  202,  they  are 
stated  to  be  much  older  than  the  reign  of  Edw.  1. 

(/)  10  Mod.  57,  perPoTvys,  J.,  and  in  Widdrington's  case,  M.  13  Car.  2  ;  1  Lev. 
25.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  132,  the  antiquity  is  stated  as  in  the  text.  Hern's  case  is  there 
stated  to  have  been  the  first  writ  of  mandamus  ;  its  date,  however,  is  not  mention- 
ed. Imp.  Man.  1,  n.  {a).  So  in  Riley,  534,  is  a  mandamus,  an.  5  Edw.  2,  which 
is  cited  in  Dr.  Askew's  case,  Burr.  2190.  Early  instances  of  the  writ  are,  Anable's 
case,  temp.  Hen.  6.  Middleton's  case,  2  Dyer,  332  b  ;  E.  T.  16  Eliz.  Tompson  v. 
Edmunds,  2  Roll.  Abr.  456,  pi.  4 ;  T.  4  Jac.  Meddlecott's  case,  10  Eliz.;  6  Edw. 
2  ;  Clo.  Roll.  Mem.  8. 

[g)  T.  13  Jac.  1  ;  11  Rep.  93  b,  which  has  been  often  alleged  to  have  been  the 
first  case  of  mandamus,  1  Show.  263;  some  have  limited  the  expression  to  the  first 
mandamus  "  in  corporation  cases,"  R.  v.  Barker,  1  W.  Blac.  352,  per  Lord  Mans- 
field, C.  J.     R.  V.  Heathcote,  (Mayor,)  10  Mod.  57,  per  Powis,  J. 

(A)  Stra.  540,  per  Fortescue,  J.  See  post,  tit.  "Judgment,"  (Entry  of  Proceed- 
ings.) 

{%)  Bibl.  Cotton,  Cleopatra,  f.  Ill,  f.  115. 


ORiaiNANDHISTORT.  57 

during  the  fourteenth  and  the  commencement  of  the  fifteenth  centu- 
ries. (/)  ^ 

At  this  period,  the  writ  was  in  form  no  more  than  a  mere  letter  mis- 
sive from  the  sovereign  power  commanding  ("  mandamus,")  the  perform- 
ance of  a  particular  act  or  duty  by  those  to  whom  it  was  directed  and 
sent;  to  it  no  return  was  allowed,  and  disobedience  of  its  commands  was 
punishable  by  attachment.  (A-) 

Subsequently,  during  the  latter  half  of  the  fifteenth  century,  the  writ 
was  directed  to  issue  ^' per  regem  et  concilium"  upon  a  petition  to  Parlia- 
ment for  redress ;  it  then  became  in  form  a  parliamentary  writ ;(/)  and 
about  the  same  time,  from  it  being  chiefly  used  merely  to  enforce  restitu- 
tion to  public  oflices,  received  from  such  its  object  and  eflfect,  the  appel- 
lation of  "  Writ  of  Restitution"  by  which  name  it  is  designated  in  all 
the  older  abridgments  and  reports,  (wi) 

At  length,  on  account  of  its  extensive  use  and  highly  remedial  nature, 
it  obtained  the  sanction  of  an  original  writ,  and  was  dispensed  by  the 
Court  of  B.  R.  in  all  cases  where  there  was  a  legal  right  to  justice,  but 
for  which  right  the  law  had  not  provided  any  specific  legal  remedy,(?!) 
and  by  an  amplification  of  its  jurisdiction,  it  was  allowed  to  embrace  mat- 
ters not  strictly  involving  the  notion  of  a  restitution ;  as  where  it  com- 
manded an  "  admission"  to  an  office,  &c.  At  the  same  time  its  appel- 
lation was  again,  but  for  the  last  time  changed  to  that  of  "manda- 
miis"(o)  which,  when  such  writs  were  in  Latin,  was  the  first  word  of  the 
mandatory  clause. (^j) 

*0f  late  years  our  writ  has  been  liberally  interposed  for  the  p  ^,.  -, 
benefit  of  the  subject  and  the  advancement  of  justice ;  and  it 
would  seem,  from  a  consideration  of  the  several  acts  of  Parliament  which 
have  recently  been  passed  with  a  view  to  make  it  more  remedial  and  use- 
ful, that  it  is  the  general  policy  of  the  Legislature  to  promote  it  as  a  rem- 
edy. (^) 

(y)  See  Appendix,  Forms  A.  B.  C.  and  D. 

{k)  R.  V.  Dublin  (Dean,)  Stra.  540,  per  Fortescue,  J.  R.  v.  Dublin  fDean,)  8  Mod. 
29.  R.  V.  New  Coll.,  2  Lev.  15.  R.  v.  Buckingham  (Corp.,)  10  Mod.  175.  See 
such  a  writ,  Appendix  (A.)  "  Mandata  principum,  sunt  monita  et  prfficepta  quis 
rectoribus  provinciarum,  aliisque  magistratibus  palam,  vel  arcano,  litteris  daban- 
tur,"  Frontin  :  de  Aquasductib.  Artie.  3.  It  is  not,  however,  to  be  understood 
by  the  above  quotation  that  the  Romans  had  any  such  proceeding  as  a  "  Manda- 
mus." 

(Z)  Riley,  fol.  601.  R.  v.  St.  John's,  Cam.,  Comb.  281  ;  2  Keb.  167,  168,  per 
Twisden,  J.  See  Appendix,  Form  D.  See  post,  tit.  '•University"  (Scholar,  Res- 
toration.) 

[m)  See  Taylor's  case,  Poph.  133 ;  Bulstrode's  Rep.  passim.  R.  v.  Taylor,  3 
Salk.  230.     See  Lord  Hale's  Analysis, -where  it  is  so  called. 

{n)  R.  V.  Dublin  (Dean),  8  Mod.  29. 

(o)  See  Form,  Appendix  D. 

(p)  In  temp.  Hen.  2,  the  mandatory  clause  of  writs  usually  commenced  witli  the 
words,  "  praecipio  tibi,"  or  "  ideo  pnecipio  tibi."  Glan.  lib.  1,  cc.  13,  14,  17,  19, 
&c.  ;  lib.  6,  cc.  5,  15,  18.  Inter  mandare  et  prtecipere  hoc  interest,  quod  ilhid  est 
minus  imperio  sum,  et  erga  ajquales,  aut  etiam  supcriores  exercetur,  hoc  to- 
tum  est  imperii,  et  potestatis.  Illo  quippiam  edicimus  ab  alio  saipe  cxequendum 
quam  ei  cui  mandamus,  hoc  ab  ipso  illo  cui  pra^cipimus.  Sueton.  in  Ner.  c.  40, 
extr. 

(?)  R.  V.  Jeyes,  3  A.  k  E.  421.f     R.  v.  Oundle  (Manor,)  1  A.  &  E.  297.1 


58  tapping's     MANDAMUS. 


CHAPTER  THE  SECOND. 

A  DEFINITION  OF  THE  MODERN  AVRIT  OF  MANDAMUS,  TOGETHER  WITH 
A  BRIEF  OUTLINE  OF  ITS  PROCEEDINGS  FROM  THEIR  COMMENCEMENT 
TO  THEIR  TERMINATION. 

Before  proceeding  to  a  clctailecl  consideration  of  our  subject,  it  may 
be  useful  to  define  it,  and  to  state  in  a  few  words  its  general  outline. 

The  modern  writ  of  mandamus  may  be  defined  to  be,  as  before  stated, 
a  liigh  prerogative  writ,(a)  breve  regium,(i)  and  not  a  writ  of  right  ;(c) 
it  is  properly  and  in  its  nature,  a  writ  of  restitution(fZ )  of  a  most  exten- 
^  ^  ^  sive  '''and  remedial  nature, (e)  to  the  aid  of  which  the  subject  is 
-"  entitled,  upon  a  proper  case  previously  shewn  to  the  satisfaction 
of  the  Court  of  B.  R.(/)  It  is  founded  on  Magna  Charta,  cap.  29,(</) 
and  was  introduced  to  ampliate  justice  by  the  prevention  of  disorders, 
arising  from  either  a  failure  or  defect  of  police.  It  is  therefore  used  and 
resorted  to  on  all  occasions  where  the  prosecutor  has  a  legal  power  conse- 
quent upon  the  violation  of  some  legal  right  or  duty,  for  which  the  law 
has  not  established  any  specific  or  adequate  legal  remedy,  and  where,  in 

{a)  Ante,  p.  2.  Knipe  v.  Edwin,  4  Mod.  281.  R.  v.  Barker,  1268.  S.  C.  1  W. 
Blac.  300,  352.  R.  v.  Dublin  (Dean),  Sir.  536.  By  the  term  prerogative  writ  is 
meant  either  firstly,  that  the  power  to  award  is  not  delegated  by  the  Crown  to  the 
ordinary  judges  between  party  and  party,  that  is,  the  justices  of  C.  B.,  but  is  re- 
served for  that  Court  in  which  the  Queen  is  supposed  to  be  personally  present ;  or 
secondly,  that  such  a  writ  is  one  of  grace  and  favour  granted  according  to  discre- 
tion upon  probable  cause  shewn,  and  not  a  writ  of  right,  that  is,  not  such  a  writ 
as  the  subject  has  a  right  to  call  upon  the  Court  to  issue  under  the  clause  of  Mag- 
na Charta,  by  which  the  Queen  is  bound  not  to  refuse  or  delay  justice  or  right.  4 
Mod.  340 ;  3  Bl.  Com.  132.     R.  v.  Cowle,  Bur.  855. 

R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  369.  R.  v.  Stafford  (Marquis),  3  T.  R.  646  ;  4  Bac. 
Abr.  Man.  C.  D.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  1  W.  Blac.  551.  R.  v.  Birmingham  Ca- 
nal, 2  W.  Blac.  708. 

(6)  R.  V.  Patrick,  1  Keb.  610.  These  writs  are  called  by  Coke  (Calvin's  case,  7 
Rep.  20  ;  Vaughan,  401),  brevia  mandatoria  remedialia,  because  they  are  resorted 
to  for  the  purpose  of  restoration,  and  not  to  turn  out,  &c.  4  Mod.  234,  281  ;  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (A).  The  writ  was  also  emi^hatically  called  the  festinum  reme- 
dium,  from  its  speedy  disi^ensation  of  justice  (Stra.  540). 

{c)  See  note  {a).  R.  v.  Excise  Commissioners,  2  T.  R.  385.  R.  v.  Clear,  4  B.  & 
C.  001. f     R.  V.  Paddington  Vestry,  9  B.  &  C.  461-1 

(rf)  R.  V.  Buckingham  (Corp.),  10  Mod.  1T3.  It  is  by  Lord  Hale,  in  his  Analy- 
sis, expressly  called  a  writ  of  restitution,  4  Mod.  234  ;  2  Bulst.  122.  R.  v.  St. 
John's  Coll.,  Comb.  281.  The  Roman  law  has  this  rule,  "  Cum  et  \(iv)3\im  restituas 
lege  invenitur  etsi  non  specialiter  de  fructibus  additum  est :  tamen  etiam  fruc- 
tus  sunt  restituendi."     D.  50,  17,  173  (1). 

(c)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  N.  &  M.  88;^f  1  Show.  219.  Calvin's  case,  7  Rep. 
20  ;  3  Bl.  Com.  110  ;  3  Steph.  Com.  682. 

(/)  The  Court  must  be  satisfied  that  they  have  jurisdiction  to  grant  the  writ, 
because,  being  a  prerogative  M-rit,  it  will  not  be  issued  as  of  course,  nor  be  granted 
merely  for  asking.  Dr.  Askew's  case.  Burr.  2190,  2191,  2192.  The  power  of  issuing 
this  writ  belongs  exclusively  to  the  Court  of  B.  R.,  and  is  considered  as  one  of  the 
flowers  of  that  Court.  Awdley  v.  Jov,  Poph.  175  ;  Imp.  on  Man.  1,  n.  (6)  ;  3  Bl. 
Com.  110  ;  4  Mod.  240  ;  4  Inst.  71  ;  Year  Book,  1  II.  4,  pi.  19  ;  6  H.  6,  pi.  29. 

(<;)  10  Mod.  53. 


THEMODERNWRIT.  59 

justice  and  good  government,  there  ouglit  to  be  one.(/i)     It  is  not  appli- 
cable as  a  redress  for  mere  private  wrongs. (») 

In  its  form,  it  is  a  command  issuing  in  the  Queen's  name  from  the  Court 
of  B.  R.,  and  directed  to  any  officer,  person,  artificial  person,  or  corpora- 
tion within  the  Queen's  dominions,  requiring  the  performance  of  some 
act  or  duty  therein  specified,  the  execution  of  which,  such  Court  has  pre- 
viously determined  to  be  consonant  to  right  and  justice. (/) 

The  writ  is  ordinarily  obtained  on  the  motion  of  counsel  to  the  Court 
of  B.  R.  at  Westminster,  during  Term,  supported  by  a  suggestion,  on  the 
oath  of  the  party  injured  {prosecutor)  of  his  right,  and  of  the  denial  of 
justice  by  the  defendant; (7c)  whereupon,  in  order  more  fully  to  satisfy 
the  Court  that  there  is  a  probable  ground  for  its  interposition,  a  rule 
(jiisi)  is  made  (except  in  some  general  case  where  such  a  ground  r  *(j  -i 
*is  manifest), (^)  requiring  the  defendant  ''  to  shew  cause  why 
a  writ  of  mandamus  should  not  issue." 

By  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4,  relief  is  afforded  to  officers  and  other  per- 
sons, whose  duties  are  to  admit  to  offices,  or  to  do  or  perform  other  mat- 
ters, in  respect  of  which  they  claim  no  right  or  interest ;  by  providing  in 
favour  of  such  persons,  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Court  to  which  ap- 
plication is  made  for  the  writ  of  mandamus  to  relieve  them  from  the  lia- 
bilities incident  to  the  execution  thereof,  by  calling  upon  any  other  person 
having  or  claiming  any  interest  in  the  matter  of  such  writ,  to  appear  and 
shew  cause  against  the  issuing  of  the  same,  and  thereupon  to  make  such 
rules  and  orders  between  all  parties  as  the  circumstances  of  the  case  may 
require,  (m) 

If,  on  the  discussion  of  the  rule,  the  defendant  do  not  shew  a  sufficient 
cause  against  it,  it  is  made  absolute,  and  a  writ  is  issued  in  the  alterna- 
tive, commanding  him  by  a  day  therein  expressed,  called  the  "  return- 
day,"  either  to  execute  the  command  of  the  writ,  or  signify  to  the  Court 
some  reason  to  the  contrary, (v()  which  writ  is  personally  served  upon  the 
defendant. 

If  such  a  writ  be  defective  in  form,  it  may  in  certain  cases  be  amend- 
ed, but  if  the  defect  be  not  the  subject  of  amendment,  it  must 
either,  according  to  circumstances,  be  superseded  or  quashed,  for  the  pro- 
secutor cannot,  upon  such  a  writ,  safely  or  advantageously  prosecute  his 
right. 

(A)  Burr.  1265,  1268,  per  Wilmot,  J.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  300,  352,  supra.  R.  v. 
Windham,  Cowp.  3*78  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  A.  It  lies,  as  will  be  seen  hereaf- 
ter, in  some  cases  where  the  applicant  has  another,  though  a  more  tedious  reme- 
dy, or  when  the  specific  remedy  is  obsolete.  See  post,  3  Bl.  Com.  110  ;  3  Steph. 
Com.  682.     R.  t.  England  (Bank),  2  B.  &  A.  622.     R.  v.  Oxenden,  1  Show.  263. 

(i)  R.  V.  Clear,  4  B.  &  C.  901,f  per  Holroyd,  J.  R.  v.  Montacute,  1  W.  Blac.  61. 
S.  C.  1  Wils.  283  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A).  R.  t.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  536  ; 
Poph.  176  ;    1  Lev.  291. 

(/)  3  Bl.  Com.  109  ;  3  Steph.  Com.  681,  supra,  n.  [a). 

(k)  3  Bl.  Com.  Ill  ;  3  Steph.  Com.  683.     See  tit.  "  Application,"  post. 

\l)  3  Steph.  Com.  683.     See  tit.  "  Rule,"  post. 

(>«)  3  Steph.  Com.  685.     See  stat.  App. 

(w)  3  Bl.  Com.  Ill  ;  3  Steph.  683. 


60  tapping's     MANDAMUS. 

If,  however,  the  writ  be  good  both  in  substance  and  form,  the  defend- 
ant must  duly  proceed  to  execute  it,  and  if  he  by  the  time  mentioned  fail 
therein  or  do  not  return  to  the  Court  a  legally  sufficient  excuse  or  justifi- 
cation for  such  failure  in  his  respect  and  obedience,  he  is  liable  to  be  pun- 
ished for  his  contempt  by  attachment. (o)  Before  the  statute  9  Ann.  c. 
20,  the  practice  was,  not  to  issue  an  attachment  for  a  neglect  to  return 
the  writ  until  after  the  issue  of  alias  and  pluries  writ.(p) 

Formerly  if  the  defendant  returned  a  legally  sufficient  cause :  although 
false  in  fact,  the  Court  would  not((/)  try  the  truth  of  the  return  upon  affi- 
davits, but  in  the  first  instance  assume  it  to  be  true,  and  decline  to  pro- 
ceed further  on  the  mandamus. (?•)  The  prosecutor  was  therefore,  if  such 
were  the  case,  compelled  to  shew  by  extraneous  proceedings,  that  such  re- 
turn was  false,  which  was  done  by  bringing  an  action  against  the  dcfcnd- 
P  ^^  -,  ant  for  a  false  return;  and  if  it  *were  found  by  the  jury  to  be 
'-  -'  false,  the  prosecutor  not  only  recovered  damages  equivalent  to  the 
injury  sustained,  but  if  such  action  were  in  the  Court  ^of  B.  R.,  had 
awarded  to  him  a  mandamus,  peremptorily  commanding  the  defendant  to 
do  his  duty.(s) 

This  course  of  practice  having  been  found  most  oppressive  and  dilatory, 
the  Legislature,  by  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  made  the  writ  a  most  full  and 
effectual  remedy,  in  the  first  place,  for  refusal  of  admission  where  a  per- 
son is  entitled  to  a  corporate  office  or  place;  and  secondly,  for  wrongful 
removal,  when  such  an  one  is  legally  possessed ;(?)  for  such  statute 
(amended  and  extended  by  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  to  writs  of  mandamus 
in  all  cases,)  amongst  other  things  requires  that  a  return  be  immediately 
made  to  the  first  writ  of  mandamus,  thereby  rendering  the  issue  of  an 
alies  or  a  pluries  in  ordinary  cases  unnecessary.  The  same  statute  also 
declares  that  such  return  may  be  pleaded  to,  or  traversed  by  the  prosecu- 
tor, and  that  the  defendant  may  reply,  take  issue  or  demur,  and  the  same 
proceedings  had,  as  if  an  action  on  the  case  had  been  brought  for  making 
a  false  return^  and  that  after  judgment  obtained  for  the  prosecutor,  he 
shall  have  a  peremptory  writ  of  mandamus  to  compel  his  admission  or 
restitution.  (?{) 

Thus,  the  writ  of  mandamus  in  cases  within  the  statutes,  is,  to  a  cer- 
tain extent,  assimilated  both  in  its  direct  and  incidental  proceedings  to  an 
action;  the  prosecutor,  if  he  ultimately  succeed,  being  according  to  the 
maturity  of  the  case,  entitled  to  the  damages  and  costs,  to  bring  a  writ  of 
error,  and  to  issue  execution. (i^)  The  prosecutor  may,  however,  still 
bring  his  action  for  a  false  return. 

(o)  3  Bl.  Com.  111.     See  tit.  "  Return." 
{p)  See  tit.  "  Rule  to  return  writ." 
{q)  See  stats.  9  Anne,  c.  2  ;  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  post. 

{r\  3  Bl.  Com.  Ill  ;  3  Steph.  Com.  684.     See  tit.  post,  "  False  Return." 
(«)  3  Bl.  Com.  Ill  ;  3  Steph.  Com.  684.     See  tit.  "  Peremptory  Writ." 
{I)  3  Bl.  Com.  2G4.     See  stat.  App. 
(m)  3  Bl.  Com.  265.     See  stat.  App. 

{v)  3  Bl.  Com.  265.  See  post,  tit.  "  Error."  R.  y.  Jeyes,  3  A.  &  E.  421.f  R.  v. 
Oundle  (Mayor),  1  A.  &  E.  297.1 


T  H  E     M  0  D  E  R  N     W  R  I  T.  61 

If  on  the  other  hand,  the  defendant  return  to  the  writ  legally  insuffi- 
cient grounds  of  excuse  or  justification,  then  there  issues  upon  the  disal- 
lowance of  such  return,  a  second  writ,  called  a  "  peremptory  mandamus" 
peremptorily  commanding  the  defendant  to  execute  its  command,  to 
which  no  other  return  will  be  admitted,  but  a  certificate  of  perfect  obedi- 
ence and  due  execution  of  the  writ.(?(7) 

The  sufficiency  of  the  return  in  point  of  law,  was  formerly  determined, 
either  summarily  upon  motion,  in  case  it  was  clearly  bad  or  insufficient, 
or  on  concilium  after  a  special  argument,  when  its  insufficiency  was  not  so 
apparent. (ic)  But  by  a  late  statute  (G  &  7  Vict.  c.  67)  it  is  enacted, 
that  the  prosecutor  objecting  to  the  validity  of  the  return,  shall  do  so  by 
*way  of  demurrer  to  the  same,  in  like  manner  as  in  personal  ac- 
tions;(,y)  and  thereupon,  the  writ,  return,  and  demurrer,  shall  be  L  J 
entered  on  record ;  and  the  court  shall  adjudge  either  that  the  return  is 
valid  in  law,  or  that  it  is  not  valid  in  law,  or  that  the  writ  of  mandamus 
itself  is  not  valid  in  law;  and  if  it  adjudge  that  the  writ  is  valid,  but  the 
return  invalid,  they  shall  award  a  peremptory  mandamus,  and  shall  also 
in  any  event  award  costs  to  be  paid  to  the  successful  party.  The  same 
statute  also  provides,  that  either  party  shall  be  at  liberty  in  every  case 
where  judgment  is  given  against  him  upon  a  mandamus,  whether  after 
demurrer  or  otherwise,  to  prosecute  a  writ  of  error  thereon,  according  to 
the  ordinary  course  of  a  writ  of  error  in  personal  actions. (s)  So  that  by 
virtue  of  this  last  statute,  the  writ  of  mandamus  is  at  this  day,  from  the 
period  at  least  of  the  return,  entirely  assimilated  to  an  action. (a) 

If  the  prosecutor  be  ultimately  successful,  the  Court  will  award  to  him 
his  peremptory  writ  of  mandamus,  which  when  served  upon  the  defend- 
ant, he  is  bound  to  obey,  under  pain  of  an  attachment;  but  which 
peremptory  writ  is,  if  prematurely  issued,  or  for  any  inherent  defect,  lia- 
ble to  be  quashed  by  the  Court. 

If  the  defendant  be  ultimately  successful,  he  is  entitled,  under  the 
above  statutes,  to  his  costs,  and  to  writs  of  execution  against  the  prosecu- 
tor for  the  recovery  thereof. 

{w)  3  Bl.  Com.  Ill  ;  3  Steph.  Com.  684.    See  tit.  "  Peremptory  Writ." 
{x\  3  Steph  Com.  684.     See  Ind.  "  Return." 

(?/)  The  general  rules  of  pleading  and  practice  are  applicable  to  cases  of  manda- 
mus, and  its  incidental  proceedings. 

(z)  3  Steph.  Com.  685.     See  tit.  "  Error." 
\a)  3  Steph.  Com.  684.     See  tit,  "  Plea." 


62 


tapping's    mandamus. 


[^•=9] 


♦CHAPTER  THE  THIRD. 


OF  THE  LEGAL  PRINCIPLES  WHICH  GOVERN  THE  DISPENSATION  OF  THE 
WRIT  OF  MANDAMUS,  TOGETHER  WITH  AN  ALPHABETICAL  SERIES  OF 
THE  SUBJECTS  IN  RESPECT  WHEREOF  THE  WRIT  HAS  BEEN  EITHER 
GRANTED  OR   DENIED. 


1st.    Mandamus. 

1st. 

Mandamus. 

Its  jurisdiction  -         -         -         - 

9 

Tlie  absence  of  a  specific  legal 

In  -ivhat  cases  it  issues    - 

9 

remedy  continued. 

The  absence  of  a  specific  legal 

Fees,  "withholding 

24 

remedy  -         -         -         - 

18 

Feigned  issue      -        -        - 

24 

Action        -         .         .         . 

20 

Indictment          -         .         _ 

24 

Amercement        -         -         _ 

21 

Quare  impedit     -         -         - 

26 

Appeal       -         -         .         . 

21 

Quo  warranto     -         -         - 

26 

Case           -         .        .        . 

21 

Quality  of  prosecutor's  right  to 

Distress      -        -         -         _ 

21 

the  writ      -         -         -         - 

27 

Ecclesiastical  Jurisdiction   - 

22 

Of  those  subject  to  the  writ    - 

29 

Equity        -         .         .         . 

22 

2nd 

The  subjects,  alphabetically 

Lis  pendens     -         -        - 

23 

arranged,    as   to   which  the 

Error          .         .         .         _ 

23 

writ  has  been  either  granted 

Execution  -         -         -         - 

23 

or  denied   -        -        -        - 

29 

1st.  Mandamus — Its  Jurisdiction— In  icliat  Cases  it  issues. 

The  grounds  upon  which  the  Court  of  B.  R.  formerly  granted  or  re- 
fused the  writ  of  mandamus,  are  not  in  the  ancient  cases  explicitly  sta- 
ted, but  during  the  time  Lord  Mansfield  presided  in  that  Court,  he  took 
great  pains  to  state  particularly  the  circumstances  which  induced  thp 
Court  either  to  refuse  or  grant  the  writ. (a)  The  effect  of  the  various 
decisions,  however,  is,  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.  as  the  general  guardian 
of  public  rights,  and  in  exercise  of  its  authority  to  gi-ant  the  writ,  will 
render  it,  as  far  as  it  can,  the  suppletory  means  of  substantial  justice  in 
every  case  where  there  is  no  other  specific  legal  remedy  for  a  legal  right 
and  will  provide  as  effectually  as  it  can  that  all  oflBcial  duties  are  fulfilled^ 
wherever  the  subject-matter  is  properly  within  its  control;  *the 
L  -'  right  of  the  Court  to  apply  this  means  for  the  attainment  of  such 
an  end,  and  to  prevent  that  defect  of  legal  justice  which  might  otherwise 
ensue,  has  been  in  general  admitted. (6) 

The  principle  above  stated  may  be  otherwise  expressed  thus,  that  the 
Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  interpose  by  granting  the  extraordinary  writ  of  man- 


(a)  1  T.  R.  404  ;  4  B.  &  Ad.  SSO.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  124-1  Dr.  Askew's  case, 
Burr.  2188,  2189.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  E.  v.  Jeyes,  5  N.  &  M.  104.f  E.  v. 
Wyndham,  Cowp.  378, 

(b)  R.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  135,  per  Ellenborough,  C.  J. ;  2  B.  &  C. 
598.t     S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  132.t 


LEGAL     PRINCIPLES,     ETC.  G3 

damus,  unless  the  applicant  have  not  only  a  specific  legal  power,  properly 
the  subject  of  this  writ,  a  fulfilment  of  which  is  demandable  from  the 
person  to  whom  such  writ  must  be  directed,  but  also,  there  must  not  exist 
a  specific  legal  remedy,  whereby  the  fulfilment  of  such  power  may  be 
compelled  ;(c)  so  that  the  writ  will  not  be  granted  unless  to  prevent  a 
failure  of  justice,((i)  that  is,  it  issues  upon  the  assumption  that  that  which 
ought  to  have  been  done  at  a  time  past  has  not  been  done.(e) 

The  writ  can  only  properly  issue  to  command  the  doing  or  performance 
of  some  act  or  duty  in  execution  of  a  legal  obligation,  and  has  not  the 
same  operation  as  the  ancient  writ  de  non  molestando.  Thus  the  Court 
refused  the  writ  to  command  justices  to  suffer  a  dissenting  minister  to 
preach  in  a  particular  meeting-house. (/)  So  a  mandamus  will  not  be 
granted  in  anticipation  of  a  defect  of  duty  or  error  of  conduct,  (r/) 

The  Court  of  B.  E.  has  no  jurisdiction  to  grant  the  writ  in  any  case 
except  those  in  which  it  is  the  legal  judge  of  the  duty  required.  Thus 
it  cannot  interfere  with  a  visitor's  duty,  it  being  a  private  and  domestic 
jurisdiction,  over  which  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  not  ordinarily  any  con- 
trol. (7t) 

*The  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  to  command  the  execution  of  the  ,-  *-i  i  -i 
particular  act  or  duty,  the  subject-matter  of  the  writ,  must  be 
clear,  otherwise  it  will  not  interfere.  Thus,  where  the  charter  of  a 
borough  directed  that  when  it  should  happen  that  any  of  the  capital  bur- 
gesses should  die,  dwell  out  of  the  borough,  or  for  some  cause  be  re- 
moved, it  should  be  lawful  for  the  remainder  to  elect  others  in  the  place 
of  those  so  happening  to  die  or  be  removed ;  it  was  held  that  these  words 
were  not  so  unambiguous  as  to  warrant  the  Court  in  granting  a  mandamus 
to  admit  two  persons  in  the  room  of  two  non-resident  capital  burgesses, 
the  corporation  not  having  previously  removed  them  from  their  offices  for 
this  cause,  (i)     Formerly  the  Court  was  very  astute  in  seeing  to  its  juris- 

(c)  1  T.  R.  404  ;  4  B.  &  Ad.  SGO.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  124.t  R.  v.  Windham,  1 
Cowp.  311. 

(d)  R.  V.  Fowey  (Mayor),  2  B.  &  0.  598.f  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  132.  R.  v.  Norfolk 
(J.),  1  D.  &  R.  75.t  R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  2  T.  R.  345.  R.  v.  Montacute,  1  W.  Blac. 
64.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.  Dr.  Askew's  case,  Burr.  2189.  R.  y.  Canterbury  (Archbp.), 
8  East,  219.  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  133.  R.  t.  Chester,  1  W.  Blac. 
22.     S.  C.  1  Wils.  206.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 

(e)  R.  v.  Gloucester  (J.),  6  N.  &  M.  117,  118.t^  R.  v.  Leeds  (J.),  4  T.  R.  583.  R. 
V.  Wilts  (J.),  13  East,  352.  R.  v.  Essex  (J.),  4  B.  &  Aid.  27G.t  R.  v.  Salop  (J.), 
4B.  &A.  626.     R.  v.  Suffolk  (J.),  9D.  &R.  lll.f     S.  C.  6  B.  &  C.  llO.f 

(/)  Peat's  case,  6  Mod.  229.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  572.  It  seems,  however,  according 
to  the  reasoning  of  the  Roman  law,  that  the  quiescence  or  neutrality  of  the  justi- 
ces, as  stated  in  the  text,  would  have  been  deemed  equivalent  to  "  action."  For  it 
is  laid  down  in  such  law,  that  "  Qui  non  facit,  quod  facere  debet ;  videtur  facere 
adversus  ea,  quia  non  facit.  Et  qui  facit,  quod  facere  non  debet :  non  videtur  fa- 
cere id,  quod  facere  jussus  est."     Paulus,  (lib.  13,  ad  Edict.)  D.  50,  17.  121. 

(<7)  Blackborough  v.  Davis,  1  P.  Wms.  48. 

[h)  Year  Book,  8  Edw.  3  ;  Lib.  Ass.  pi.  29.  Philips  v.  Bury,  1  Sid.  71.  S.  C. 
2  Show.  170  ;  Mod.  82.  2  Keb.  799,  861.  S.  0.  cited  in  2  T.  R.  355.  R.  v.  Ches- 
ter (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  22.    S.  C.  1  Wils.  206. 

[i]  R.  V.  Truro  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  A.  590.  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  54.  S.  C. 
1  Wils.  266. 


64  tapping's    mandamus. 

diction,  even,  for  instance,  in  a  case  wliere  a  statute  specially  delegated  to 
the  Court  the  power  of  enforcing  c.itain  duties  and  requirements  by  writ 
of  uiandanius  j(y)  because  the  ancient  form  and  metbod  of  proceeding  by 
mandamus  prevented  the  judgment  of  the  Court  froni  being  reversed  by 
any  Court  of  Error,  a  consideration  which  induced  the  Court  to  be  cau- 
tious in  assuming  jurisdiction;  but  now,  since  this  defect  has  been  reme- 
died by  statute,  tlie  Court  never  declines  to  interfere  in  any  case  clearly 
within  its  jurisdiction ;  for  it  has  no  more  right  to  refuse  to  any  of  the 
Queen's  subjects  the  redress  which  it  is  empowered  to  administer,  than  to 
enforce  against  them  powers  not  confided  to  it.(Z;) 

As  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  writ,  it  may  be  generally  stated,  that  it 
comprehends  the  execution  of  the  common  law,  of  statutes,  acts  of  Par- 
liament,(?)  or  of  the  King's  charter,(wi)  in  all  cases  for  which  there  exists 
no  legal  remedy.  It  is  not,  however,  applicable  as  a  private  remedy,  (n) 
to  enforce  simple  common  law  rights  between  individuals  as  to  compel 
payment  of  money  due  on  bond,  or  the  restitution  of  chattels,  still  less  to 
command  a  party  to  abstain  from  a  tort  or  from  the  abuse  of  his  office. (o) 

And  where  the  Court  of  B.  E..  has  power  to  amend  all  extra-judicial 
errors  which  tend  to  the  breach  of  the  peace,  oppression  of  the  subject, 
p.;.  -.(y-,  *or  other  misgovernance,(/>)  such  Court  may,  by  such  writ,  com- 
*-  "  mand  right  to  be  done.  Thus  where  a  corporate  officer  is  amoved 
without  cause,  he  may  be  restored  by  mandamus.  («7) 

So  wherever  there  is  a  right  to  execute  an  office,  to  perform  a  service, 
or  exercise  a  function  or  franchise,  (more  especially  if  it  be  matter  of 
public  concern,  or  attended  with  profit,) (/•)  and  a  person  is  kept  out  of 
possession  or  dispossessed  of  such  right,  and  has  no  specific  legal  remedy, 
the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  assist  by  mandamus  for  the  sake  of  justice,  in 
order  to  preserve  peace  and  order  :  or  as  the  writ  formerly  expressed  it, 
''  Nos  A.  B.  debitam  et  festinam  justitiam  in  hac  parte  fieri  volentes  ttt 
est  justum."(s) 

Formerly  the  received  idea  was,  that  a  maudamus  would  lie  only  to 
command  the  performance  of  a  ministerial  duty ;  but  modem  cases  have 
gone  much  further,  and  it  is  now  the  constant  practice  to  grant  the  writ, 
to  command  the  performance  by  any  inferior  jurisdiction  or  officer,  of  any 

[j)  R.  V.  Greene,  6  A.  &  E.  548.1     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  C31.f 

[k)  R.  V.  Bristow,  6  T.  R.  170.  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E. 
515.1     S.  C..4P.  &  D.  48. 

[l)  3  B.  &  A.  590  ;  1  W.  Blac.  54.     S.  C.  1  Wils.  266. 

(m)  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  404.     R.  v.  Severn  Railway,  2  B.  &  A.  646,  648. 

(n)  Per  Buller,  J.,  1  T.  R.  404.  R.  v.  Wheeler,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  99.  R.  v.  Manta^ 
cute,  1  W.  Blac.  61.     S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A). 

(o)   1  X.  &  P.  527.     S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  392.t     R.  v.  Pearh,  2  Salk.  572. 

[p)  11  Co.  98  a.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A).  R.  t.  Cxenden,  I  Show.  219  ;  2 
Hawk.  P.  C.  7,  9. 

(q)  Ray.  431.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A). 

(r)  The  value  of  the  matter,  or  the  depfree  of  its  importance  to  the  public  police, 
is  not  scrupulously  weighed.  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  12G5.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man." 
257.    R.  V.  Oxenden,  1  Show.  263.     See  post,  tit.  "  Office." 

(«)  R.  V.  Barker,  Burr.  1267.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  352,  552.  R.  v.  Windham, 
Cowp.  378.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 


LEGAL     PRINCIPLES,     ETC.  65 

public  duty  for  which  there  is  no  specific  remedy. (<)  The  duty  must  be 
a  public  one,(?f)  though  the  value  to  the  public  is  not  scrupulously  weigh- 
ed ;(y)  it  must  also  be  of  a  temporal  nature, (?/;)  unless  jurisdiction  be 
given  to  the  Court  by  some  positive  law,  as  by  those  acts  of  Parliament 
which  direct  the  making  and  levying  of  church  rates. (a;) 

The  duty  must  also  be  imperative, (y)  and  not  discretionary ;  there 
*being  numerous  eases  which  clearly  establish  that  a  mandamus  r  :i--|  o  -i 
cannot  issue  to   enforce  the  exercise  of  a  discretionary  power, 
except  in  those  cases  where  such  discretion  is  limited  as  to  time,  and 
such  time  has  passed.  (,:;) 

It  does  not  lie  to  command  the  doing  of  a  particular  judicial  act,  for 
such  an  act  is  clearly  discretionary,  and  therefore  it  is  that  the  writ, 
when  directed  to  judicial  persons,  is  general  in  its  terms. (a)  Thus 
the  quashing  of  a  rate,  being  a  judicial  act,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  cannot 
command  the  justices,  by  mandamus,  so  to  do.(/^.)  So  where  a  magistrate 
had  exercised  his  discretion  by  refusing  to  convict  on  the  evidence  ad- 
duced before  him,  in  support  of  an  information,  the  Court  refused  to  com- 
mand him  by  mandamus  to  rehear  the  case,  or  return  the  proceedings 
which  had  taken  place  before  him.(c)  So  where  an  appellant  against  an 
order  of  affiliation,  moved  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  for  a  postpone- 
ment of  the  appeal,  on  account  of  the  absence  of  material  witnesses ;  which 
being  refused,  the  appellant  declined  to  go  into  his  case,  whereupon  the 
order  was  confirmed 3  the  Court,  on  motion  for  a  mandamus  to  the  justices 
to  hear  the  appeal,  notwithstanding  the  production  of  affidavits  tending  to 
show  that  they  had  acted  unjustly  in  not  granting  the  postponement,  re- 
fused to  interfere,  the  matter  being  one  peculiarly  within  the  judicial  cog- 
nizance and  discretion  of  the  magistrates. (tZ)  For  if  it  appear  that  the 
sessions  have  exercised  a  discretion  in  a  matter  which  properly  belongs  to 

[i)  R.  V.  Fowey  (Mayor),  2  B.  &  C.  596,f  per  Best,  J.  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  143.f 
R.  V.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  399.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524.t  R.  v.  Exeter  (Chapter),  12  A. 
&  E.  528.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  252  ;  Stra.  159,  536,  1082.  R.  v.  Blooer,  Burr.  1043  ; 
3  B.  &  Ad.  95.t  R.  v.  Litchfield  (Ep.),  7  Mod.  218,  per  Lord  Hardwicke,  C.  J.  S. 
C.  Kel.  287.  S.  C.  2  Barn.  365,  429.  R.  v.  Derby  (Councillors),  7  A.  &  E.  421. f 
S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  589. f  Carpenter's  case,  Ray.  439.  R.  v.  Middlesex  (Archdeacon), 
3  A.  &  E.  615.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  494.f  R.  v.  Peach,  2  Salk.  572.  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"  Man."  (A). 

(m)  R.  v.  England  (Bank),  2  B.  &  A.  622,t  per  Bayley,  J.  R.  v.  Dublin  (Dean), 
Stra.  536.  R.  v.  North  Riding  (J.),  2  B.  &  C.  290.f  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Rail- 
way, 10  A.  &  E.  557. t     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48. 

[v]  R.  V.  Barker,  Burr.  1265.  Bac.  Abr,  tit.  "Man."  257.  R.  v.  Oxenden,  1 
Show.  263. 

(w)  Burr.  1046.     R.  v.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  536.  (2;)  See  tit.  "  Church." 

(y)  R.  V.  Hughes,  3  A.  &  E.  429,  432.}  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  94.f 
(z)  R.  V.  Treasury  Commissioners,  4  A.  &  E.  297.t  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  589.f  And 
see  R.  v.  Darlington  School,  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  124,  Q.  B.  Where  "  a  discretion  "  is 
given  ;  by  it  is  understood  a  sound  discretion,  and  according  to  law,  for  the  Court 
of  B.  R.  has  power  to,  and  will  redress  things  otherwise  done  ;  Estwick  v.  London 
(City),  Styles,  43. 

(a)  See  tit.  "  Office,"  (Officers  judicial,  &c.) 

(b)  R.  V.  Middlesex  (J.),  9  A.  &  E.  546.f 

(c)  Ex  parte  The  British  Patent  Companr.  7  D.  G14. 
\d)  Ex  parte  Beck,  3  B.  &  Ad.  704.f 

April,  1852.— 5 


66  tapping's     MANDAMUS. 

their  jurisdiction,  it  is  an  invariable  rule  that  the  Court  of  B.  II.  does  not 
interfere,  (f?) 

As  it  lies  not  to  command  the  exercise  of  a  discretionary  or  voluntary 
act,  power,(y")  or  right,(_9)  of  what  kind  soever;  so  ueitlier  docs  it  lie  to 
influence  nor  control  the  exercise  of  such  a  discretionary  act,  power,  or 
r*1  J.  1  right. (/()  Thus,  the  Court  will  not  grant  the  writ  where  a  matter 
^  is  *left  to  the  discretion  of  an  individual,  or  body  of  men,  which 

discretion  has  been  exercised,  and  no  ground  appears  that  it  has  been  done 
wrongfully. (/)  So  the  Court  will  not  interfere  with  the  discretion  of  an 
inferior  jurisdiction,  where  it  is  exercised  in  accordance  with  reasonable 
rules  or  practice,(y)  which  principle  has  been  since  confirmed  by  many 
cases. (/t) 

It  must,  however,  be  clearly  understood,  that  although  there  may  be  a 
discretionary  power,  yet  if  it  be  exercised  with  manifest  injustice,  the 
Court  of  B.  R.  is  not  precluded  from  commanding  its  due  exercise;  the 
jurisdiction,  under  such  circumstances,  being  clearly  established. (?)  Thus, 
the  Quarter  Sessions  has  a  discretion  to  exercise  with  respect  to  what  is 
reasonable  time  for  giving  a  notice  6f  appeal ;  but  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has 
also  a  kind  of  visitatorial  jurisdiction  over  them  in  the  exercise  of  such 
discretionary  power,  and  where  the  Court  thinks  that  they  have  not  exer- 
cised it  in  a  way  that  ought  to  be  given  efiect  to,  it  will  interfere  by  man- 
damus and  correct  it.(??i)  So  where  one  is  to  act  according  to  his  discre- 
tion, and  he  will  not  act,  nor  even  consider  the  matter,  the  Court  of  B.  R. 
will,  by  mandamus,  command  him  to  put  himself  in  motion  to  do  \i.[n) 
Thus,  if  justices -reject  an  application  in  the  exercise  of  the  discretion 
vested  in  them  by  the  Legislature,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  interfere ; 
but  if  they  reject  it  on  the  ground  that  they  have  no  power  to  grant  it, 

(e)  R.  V.  Norfolk  (J.),  1  D.  &  R.  U.f  R.  v.  Kent  (J.),  14  East,  396.  See  post, 
tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions." 

(/)  R.  T.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  254.f  R.  v.  Gloucester  (Ep.),  2  B.  &  Ad. 
158.1 

{g)  R.  V.  Eye  (Bailiffs),  1  B.  &  C.  85.  S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  l1l.-\  See  9  B.  &  C. 
21.t 

(A)  R.  V.  North  Riding  (J.),  2  B.  &  C.  290.f  R.  v.  Eye  (Bailiffs),  1  B.  &  C.  SS.f 
S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  172.t  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  B.  1.  Wright  v.  Fawcett,  Burr. 
2041  ;  Ld.  Raym.  1244  ;  Fort.  283  ;  R.  v.  Dr.  Askew,  Burr.  2180. 

(i)  R.  V.  Flockwold  Inclosure,  2  Chit.  251.f  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  2  Show.  14. 
See  Blackborough  v.  Davis,  Comyns,  26.  R.  v.  Kent  (J.),  11  East,  230.  R.  v. 
Mills,  2  B.  &  Ad.  578.t  Ex  parte  "Blackmore,  1  B.  &  Ad.  123.f  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."  (B.)  1.  R.  v.  Monmouthshire  (J.),  1  B.  &  Ad.  895.f  R.  v.  London  (May- 
or), 3  B.  &  Ad.  255,  265.f  R.  v.  Fowey  (Mayor),  2  B.  &  C.  588.f  R.  v.  Norfolk 
(J.),  1  D.  &  R.  74.f 

(/)  3  D.  306. 

(k)  R.  V.  Lancashire  (J.),  IB.  k  G.  691. f  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  5  B.  &  Adol. 
667. t 

(I)  Ex  parte  Becke,  3  B.  &  Ad.  704  ;f  10  East,  404.  R.  v.  Lancashire  (.!.),  7  B. 
&  C.  092.t 

(;«)  R.  V.  Wilts  (J.),  10  East,  404,  per  Ellenborough,  C.  J.,  cited  in  and  com- 
mented on  in  R.  v.  Monmouthshire  (.J.),  3  D.  310,  311  ;  but  see  R.  v.  West  Riding 
(J.),  5  B.  &  Ad.  671, f  per  Parke,  J.  See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

(«)  R.  V.  North  Riding  (J.),  2  B.  &  C.  291.f  R.  v.  Mills,  2  B.  &  Ad.  578.f  R.  v. 
Holbecke,  4  T.  R.  779. 


LEGAL     PRINCIPLES,     ETC.  67 

the  Court  will  interfere,  so  far  as  to  set  the  jurisdiction  of  the  magistrates 
in  motion,  by  directing  them  to  hear  and  determine  upon  the  applica- 
tion.(o)  So  although  the  fact  of  '■'■  approval"  for  offices  may  he  in  the 
discretion  of  a  party,  yet  such  party  must  inquire,  as  to  enable  himself  to 
exercise  a  considerate  discretion  on  the  subject,  and  if  he  will  not  so 
inquire,  it  is  a  fit  case  for  the  interference  of  the  Court  to  command  fur- 
ther inquiry. (^^)  *There  is,  therefore,  no  instance  of  a  mandamus  i-  ji:-]  r  -i 
to  compel  an  ''  approval,"  but  the  Court  will,  by  mandamus, 
compel  an  inquiry,  and  in  so  doing  it  does  not  at  all  interfere  with  the 
exercise  of  such  discretion. (g') 

The  object  of  the  granting  of  the  writ  of  mandamus  being,  as  before 
stated,  to  prevent  a  failure  of  justice,(r)  and  to  provide  an  immediate  and 
efficacious  remedy,  it  follows  that  it  will  not  be  granted  if,  when  granted, 
it  would  be  nugatory,  (s)  in  accordance  with  the  maxim.  Lex  non  cogit  ad 
inutilia.(^)  For  the  principle  upon  which  alone  the  Court  of  B.  R. 
exercises  this  prerogative  power  is,  that  a  strong  political  necessity  for 
such  remedy  exists,  and  that  without  it  the  ends  of  justice  must  be  de- 
feated. («) 

So  the  Court  will  refuse  it,  if  it  be  manifest  that  it  must  be  vain  and 
fruitless,(v)  or  useless,(i«)  or  cannot  have  a  beneficial  efiFect.(x)  Thus 
where  the  writ  is  sought  to  one  magistrate  to  command  him  to  do  that 
which  cannot  be  done  but  by  two.(j/') 

So  it  will  be  refused  where  it  is  clearly  unnecessary, (s)  as  where,  by 
reason  of  an  offer  or  concession  from  the  other  side,  the  object  of  the  writ 
is  attained. (a.)  So  the  Court  will  not  grant  it  to  command  the  per- 
formance of  anything  in  future  which  has  always  been  voluntarily  done 
before.  Thus,  where  trustees  under  a  road  act  had  turned  a  road 
through  an  inclosure,  and  made  the  fences  at  their  own  expense,  and 
repaired  them  for  several  years,  a  mandamus  was  refused  to  command 
them  to  continue  such  repairs. (6) 

[o]  R.  V.  Kent  (.L),  14  East,  396. 

(V)  R.  V.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  135.  R.  v.  Kent  (J.),  14  East,  395.  R. 
V.  Gloucester  (Ep.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  158. f     See  tit.  "  Lectureship,"  post. 

[q)   14  East,  399,  400  ;   15  East,  138,  supra.  (r)  Ante,  p.  10. 

(s)  R.  V.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  11.  S.  C.  nom.  Lecturer  of  St.  Anne's  Stra.  1192. 
R.  V.  Exeter  (Ep.),  2  East,  466.  The  Protector  v.  Craford,  Styles,  457.  R.  v.  Pem- 
brokeshire (J.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  391.f  R.  v.  Whitaker,  9  B.  &  C.  648.f  R.  v.  Milverton 
(Manor),  3  A.  &  E.  285.f 

{t)  R.  V.  London  (Ep.),  12  East,  420,  n.  (a).  See  Stra.  763.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym. 
1479. 

(m)  R.  v.  Fowey  (Mayor),  4  D.  &  R.  134.f  S.  C.  2  B.  &  0.  591.t  R.  v.  The  Pad- 
dington  Vestry,  9  B.  &  C.  456.f  R.  v.  The  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E. 
543.f     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48. 

[v]  R.  V.  Heathcote,  10  Mod.  55,  per  Eyre,  J.  R.  v.  Milverton  (Manor),  3  A.  &E. 
285.t 

(w)  R.  V.  Sewers'  Commissioners,  Stra.  763.  S.  C.  Lord  RajTii.  1479.  R.  v.  Bir- 
mingham Railway,  1  G.  &  D.  335.     S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  47.t 

[x]  R.  V.  Northwich  Savings'  Bank,  9  A.  &  E.  729.}     S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  477. 

(?/)  R.  V.  Sillefant,  5  N.  &  M.  643.f 

{z\  R.  V.  Pitt,  10  A.  &  E.  372.f    S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  285. 

la)  Anon.  Loff't.  148.    See  tit.  "  Application,"  (Demand  and  Refusal,)  post. 

(6)  R.  V.  Llandilo  Roads,  2  T.  R.  232.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B). 


68  tapping's    mandamus. 

So  the  Court  will  refuse  it  if  it  see  that  it  must  ultimately  fail.(c) 
Thus,  to  a  mandamus  to  make  a  sewers'  rate  to  reimburse  an  expen- 
ditor,  it  was  returned  that  the  writ  was  not  delivered  till  the  12th 
February,  and  that  the  commission  expired  four  days  afterwards,  and 
r  *1  R  1  "^^^^^  therefore  the  defendants  had  not  time,  &c.  The  Court,  on 
allowing  the  return,  said  that  a  peremptory  mandamus  could  not 
be  granted,  it  appearing  there  was  then  no  power  in  any  body  to  execute 
the  writ.((/) 

So  the  Court  will  see  that  the  object  of  the  mandamus  is  for  some 
proper  and  definite  purpose,  and  not  for  the  gratification  of  mere 
curiosity. (r)  Thus,  it  has  been  held,  that  a  parishioner  cannot  have  a 
mandamus  to  inspect  churchwardens'  and  overseers'  accounts,  under 
Stat.  17  Geo.  2,  c.  38,  without  showing  some  special  ground  for  wishing 
to  see  them,  or  that  there  is  a  grievance  for  which  the  writ  would  be  a 
remedy.(/) 

Nor  will  the  Court  grant  it  where  it  is  sought,  merely  in  order  to  obtain 
the  opinion  of  the  Court  on  a  point  of  law.(,'7) 

So  the  Court  will  not  grant  the  writ  if  it  will  introduce  confusion  and 
disorder,(/i)  or  be  vexatious,(i)  or  where  it  is  manifestly  improper(y)  or 
absurd,  as  if  the  writ  asked  against  A.,  to  oblige  B.  to  do  an  act. (A-)  So 
although  the  Court  will,  by  mandamus,  order  that  to  be  done  which 
ought  to,  and  may  lawfully  be  done,  yet  it  will  not  require  that  to  be  done 
which  is  indecorous  in  its  nature,  for  non  omne  quod  licet,  honestum  est,(?) 
nor  which  may  become  the  subject  of  indictment  as  a  public  nuisance;(m) 
nor  that  which  is  illegal, (?i)  or  which  cannot  be  legally  enforeed,(o)  it 
being  also  a  rule  of  the  Roman  law  that  "  Quod  contra  rationem  juris 
P  ^-j  „  1  receptum  est,  non  est  producendum  *ad  consequentia.(p)  Thus, 
'■  where  the  condition  *of  a  constables'  bond  was  contrary  to  the 

(c)  R.  V.  Bateman,  4  B.  &  Ad.  553,f  per  Lord  Denman,  C.  J. 

Id)  Stra.  1G3.     S.  C.  Lord  Raym.  1479. 

(e)  R.  V.  Stafifordshire  (J.),  6  A.  &  E.  dO.f     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  211. f 

(/)  E.  v.  Clear,  4  B.  &  C.  899.t  S.  C.  7  D.  &  R.  393  ;t  6  A.  &  E.  90,  lOl.f  S. 
C.  1  N.  &  P.  277.1     See  tits.  "Books,"  "  Parish,"  (Inspection),  &c. 

{g)  R.  v.  Blackwall  Railway,  9  D.  558. 

{h)  R.  T.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  59.    S.  C.  1  Wils.  266. 

li)  R.  V.  St.  John's  Coll.  Comb.  238. 

Ij)  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  2  T.  R.  33G,  337.  R.  v.  Bangor  (Overseers),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
58,  M.  C. 

{k)  R.  V.  Derby  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  436.  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  "W.  Blac.  56.  S.  C.  1 
Wils.  266.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (C).    Bac.  xVbr.  tit.  '-Man.''  (F). 

[l)  Paulus,  lib.  62,  Edict.  D.  50,  17,  144. 

(to)  R.  t.  Coleridge,  1  Chit.  597,f  per  Abbott,  C.  J. 

(n)  In  re  Lodge,  2  A.  &  E.  123.f  R.  v.  Liverpool  (Customs),  2  M.  &  S.  223.  R. 
T.  London  (Customs),  1  M.  &.  S.  259.  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  &c.,  5  N.  &  M.  228.f  S. 
0.  3  A.  &  E.  535.f  As  to  a  mandamus  for  purposes  partly  legal  and  partly  not,  R. 
V.  Thames  Commissioners,  5  A.  &  E.  815,f  And  see  3  A.  &  E.  535. f  S.  C.  5  N.  & 
M.  228,t  supra.  R.  v.  Lord  Godolphin,  8  A.  &  E.  347.f  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  488.f  See 
also  R.  V.  Middlesex  (J.),  9  A.  &  E.  540.f     S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  402. 

(o)  R.  V.  Northleach  Roads,  &c.,  5  B.  &  Ad.  984.f  R.  v.  York  (J.),  4  B.  &  Ad. 
342.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  108  ;t  5  N.  &  M.  228.f  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  535,f  supra.  R.  v. 
Sparrow,  7  Mod.  393.  S.  C.  Stra.  1123.  R.  v.  Stamp  Commissioners,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
75,  Q.  B.  (p)  Paulus,  Ub.  50.  ad  Edict.  D.  50,  17,  141. 


LEGAL     PRINCIPLES,     ETC.  C9 

statute  in  that  behalf,  the  Court  would  not,  by  mandamus,  command  the 
justices  to  put  it  in  suit,  as  they  had  no  authority  to  enforce  the  condi- 
tion,(5-)  nor  will  the  Court  compel,  by  mandamus,  the  doing  of  an  act 
which  is  not  authorized  by  law,  because  the  party  who  is  called  upon  to 
do  it  has  not  resisted  doing  it  by  appealing  to  another  tribunal ;  but  as 
the  Court  of  B.  R.  is  only  suppletory  to  the  defects  of  other  jurisdictions, 
it  will  enlarge  the  rule  until  the  appeal  be  made.(r)  So  a  mandamus  will 
not  be  granted  to  command  any  person  to  exercise  a  jurisdiction  which 
that  person  is  not  most  clearly  and  certainly  appointed  to,  and  bound  by 
law  to  exercise  ;(s)  for  the  Court  will  not  grant  such  writ  except  it  clearly 
see  that  there  is  a  power  lodged  in  the  person  against  whom  the  mandamus 
is  prayed. (<) 

Nor  will  the  Court  grant  it  merely  for  the  sake  of  a  return,  (?/)  nor 
against  a  person  as  an  inferior  ministerial  officer,  who  obeys  a  power  which 
he  is  unable  to  resist,  (v) 

Formerly  the  Court  would  not  in  any  case  grant  the  writ  where  it 
would  subject  those  executing  it  to  an  action. (?<))  But  since  the  statute 
6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  by  which  it  is  enacted  that  no  action,  suit,  or  any 
other  proceeding  shall  be  commenced  or  prosecuted  against  any  person  or 
persons  whatsoever,  for  or  by  reason  of  any  thing  done  in  obedience  to 
any  peremptory  writ  of  mandamus(jc)  issued  by  any  Court  having  authority 
to  issue  writs  of  mandamus :  it  is  apprehended,  according  to  the  principle,  ces- 
sante  causa,  cessat  eflfectus,  that  the  Court  is  not  now  so  strict  in  this  respect. 

The  Court  has,  however,  refused  the  writ  in  a  case  where  it  would  have 
had  the  effect  of  subjecting  third  parties  to  penalties  under  the  revenue 
laws,  &c.(y) 

*  i/ie  absence  or  loant  of  a  specific  legal  remedy.  The  writ  of  man- 
damus is  not  a  writ  grantable  of  right,  but  by  prerogative,(,?)  and,     L       ^ 
amongst  other  things,  it  is  (as  before  stated)(a)  the  absence  or  want  of  a  speci- 
fic legal  remedy,  which  gives  the  Court  jurisdiction  to  dispence  it(6.)  It  is  not 

{q)  In  re  Lodge,  2  A.  &  E.  123.t 

(r)  R.  T.  East  India  Company,  4  M.  &  S.  283,  284.  See  tit.  "  East  India  Com- 
pany." 

(s)    R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  268.     S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.   58.     R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.),  9 

A.  &  E.  540.t     S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  402. 

{t)  1  W.  Blac.  58,  supra.    Brideoak's  case,  H.  12  Anne,  cited  in  1  "W.  Blac.  57. 

(m)  R.  t.  Suffolk  (J.),  5  N.  &  M.  144.f  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  "725,1  per  Patteson,  J. 
R.  V.  Blackwall  Railway,  9  D.  558. 

{v)  R.  V  Middlesex  (J.),  9  A.  &  E.  540.t  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  402.  See  post,  tits. 
"Office,"  (Officer  ministerial  (inferior)),  "  Treasurer  of  County." 

[w)  R.  V.  Heathcote,  Fort.  290.  S.  C.  10  Mod.  51,  61.  See  tit.  "  Quarter  Ses- 
sions," (Justices,  &c.)  R.  v.  Dyer,  2  A.  &  E.  G06.f  S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  550.t  R.  v. 
Middlesex  (J.),  1  P.  &  D.  402.     S.  C.  9  A.  &  E.  540.t 

{x)  See  Stat.  Appendix. 

[y)  R.  V.  Westoe,  (Churchwardens),  5  A.  &  E.  "789.1  Lawrence  v.  Hooker,  5 
Bing.  6.     See  post,  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions,"  (Justices). 

(z)  Ante,  p.  4.  [a)  Ante,  pp.  3,  4,  9. 

\b)  3  Bl.  Com.  110.  R.  v.  Bristol  Dock,  12  East,  429  ;  2  Selw.  N.  P.,  7th  edit., 
1062.  Wilkins  v.  Mitchell,  3  Salk.  229.  S.  C.  Ld.  Ravra.  340.  R.  v.  Windham, 
Cowp.  378.     R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396.  R.  v.  Yoric  (J.),  1  X.  &  M.  Ill  ;t  2 

B.  &  A.  646  ;  10  A.  &  E.  544.f    ^.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48. 


70  TAPPINO'S     MANDAMUS. 

granted  to  give  an  easier  or  more  expeditious  remedy ;  but  only  where 
there  is  no  other  rcmedy(fti,)  being  both  legal  and  spccific;(c)  and  so  long 
and  uniformly  has  the  Court  adhered  to  this  doctrine,  and  refused  to 
grant,  or,  if  granted  quashed,  the  writ,  in  cases  where  there  is  a  specific 
legal  remedy,  cither  at  common  law  or  by  act  of  Parliament,  that  it  has 
become  a  principle  of  the  law  of  this  subject.(</) 

Tliis  principle  applies  where  there  is  another  and  a  better  remcdy,(e) 
or  where  a  specific  remedy  exists,  notwithstanding  it  has  been  by  circum- 
stances rendered  unavailing, (/)  for  it  is  rare  to  grant  the  writ  where  there  is 
ft.-in-\  ^ny  other  remedy .  (i/  )  Thus,  if  a  statute  prescribe  *a  particular  remedy 
^  no  other  remedy  can  be  taken,  and  therefore,  in  such  a  case  a  man- 

damus will  not  lie.(7i)  But  if  the  remedy  be  not  equally  convenient  and  efiica- 
cious  the  Court  will  grant  the  writ,  and,  therefore,  where  commissioners 
were  liable  for  an  indictment  for  not  obeying  an  order  of  sessions,  it  did 
not  prevent  the  interposition  of  the  Court  of  B.  R.  by  mandamus.(i) 
So  it  has  been  held  that  the  usual  power  given  in  railway  acts  to  justices 
to  allow  the  proprietors  of  land  to  execute  works,  &c.,  on  refusual  of  the 
company,  is  not  such  a  specific  remedy  as  will  oust  the  Court  of  B.  R.  of 

(bb)  R.  V.  Stafford  (Marquis),  3  T.  R.  649.  R.  v.  Margate  Pier,  3  B.  &  A.  223. 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)  (C.  2.) 

(c)  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  404.  R.  v.  St.  Katherine's  Dock,  4  B.  &  Ad. 
360.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  124.f  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  8  East,  219.  R.  v.  Eng- 
land (Bank),  2  Doug.  526.  R.  v.  Nottingham  Water  Works,  1  N.  &  P.  480.t  S.  C. 
6  A.  &  E.  355  ;f  W.  W.  &  D.  166.  R.  v.  Lincoln's  Inn,  T  D.  &  R.  368,t  per  Holroyd, 
J.  R.  V.  Worcester  Canal,  1  M.  &  R.  533.  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396.  R.  v. 
Bristol  Dock,  12  East,  429.  R.  v.  Coleridge,  1  Chit.  592.  R.  v.  Clear,  7  D.  &.  R. 
393.f  S.  C.  4  B.  &  C.  899.f  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  R.  t.  Norwich  Railway, 
15  L.  J.  N.  S.  24,  Q.  B.     S.  C.  3  D.  &  L.  385. 

(d)  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396,  398.  R.  v.  Stafford  (Marquis),  3  T.  R.  649. 
R  V.  Barker,  Burr.  1265.  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  543. f  S.  C. 
4  P.  &  D.  48.  R.  v.  Gamble,  11  A.  &  E.  I2.f  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  123.  R.  v.  St. 
Peter's,  12  A.  &  B.  512.f  Wilkins  v.  Mitchell,  3  Salk.  228.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  348. 
R.  V.  Wyndham,  Cowp.  3'78.  R.  v.  Treasury  Lords,  4  A.  &  E.  286.1  S.  C.  5  N.  & 
M.  589.t  R.  V.  Blooer,  Burr.  1045.  R.  v.  Dursley,  (Churchwardens),  6  N.  &  M. 
335.1  S.  C.  5  A.  &  E.  lO.f  R.  v.  Severn  Railway,  2  B.  i&  Aid.  646.  R.  v.  St  Paul 
(Parish),  1  M.  &  R.  596.  R.  v.  Colchester,  2  T.  R.  259.  R.v.  Canterbury  (Archbp.), 
8  East,  213.  R.  v.  Dean  (Inclosure  Comrs.),  2  M.  &  S.  80.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man." 
(A.  B.)  R.  v.  Oxenden,  1  Show.  263.  R.  v.  Wheeler,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  100,  n.  (1)  ;  6 
A.  &  E.  355-1  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  480.t  R.  v.  Birmingham  Canal,  2  W.  Blac.  TOS  ;  1 
W.  Blac.  26,  n.  (o).  R.  v.  Cambridge  (V.  C),  Burr.  1659.  R.  v.  Hopkins,  1  Q.  B. 
lei.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  550.  R.  V.  Victoria  Park,  1  Q.  B.  288.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  639. 
R.  V.  London  Railway,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  42,  Q.  B. 

(e)  R.  V.  Gamble,  U  A.  &  E.  69.t  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  123.  R.  v.  Pitt,  10  A.  &  E. 
272.1 

(/)  R.  V.  Margate  Pier,  3  B.  &  A.  223.  See  also,  4  P.  &  D.  642.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B. 
291.1 

(ff)  Anon.,  12  Mod.  666,  per  Holt,  C.  J.  See  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  1265  ;  Cas.  t. 
Hard.  99,  supra;  3  BL  Com.  110.     See  infra,  "Indictment." 

(A)  Stevens  v.  Evans,  Burr.  1157,  per  Dcnnison,  J.     R.  v.  Margate  Pier,  3  B.  & 

A.  223.    In  re  Gateshead,  (J.)  6  A.  &  E.  550,f  n.  (a). 

(i)  R.  V.  Dean  Inclosure,  2  M.  &  S.  80;  11  A.  &  E.  72.t  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  123, 
supra,  where  Lord  Denman,  C.  J.  said,  that  it  was  thought  that  the  decision  in  2 

B.  &  A.  646  went  quite  far  enough.  R.  v.  The  Bristol  Dock,  2  Q.  B.  64.t  S.  C.  1 
G.  &  D.  286.  R.  V.  Clarke,  1  D.  &  M.  G90.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  887  ;t  12  A.  &  E.  530.1 
Stra.  1082 ;  6  East,  356;  and  4  A.  &  E.  286.f     See  post,  24. 


LEGAL     PRINCIPLES,     ETC.  71 

its  jurisdiction  to  cominimd  the  company,  by  mandamus,  to  execute  the 
works.  (,/) 

The  above  principle  prevails  only  where  such  other  remedy  is  attaina- 
ble against  that  party  to  whom  the  mandamus  should  be  directed,  not 
where  the  purpose  is  to  call  forth  the  exercise  of  a  jurisdiction  against  one 
party  by  mandamus  to  another,  (/j) 

Whether  the  taking  a  private  security  be  a  remedy  sufficient  to  nega- 
tive a  mandamus  was  raised,  but  not  settled. (^) 

If,  however,  there  is  no  such  specific  legal  remedy,  the  Court  will  grant 
the  writ.(?u)  So  if  it  be  doubtful  whether  there  be  another  effectual 
remedy,(»)  or  the  Court  does  not  clearly  see  its  way  to  one,(o)  the  writ 
will  be  granted. 

The  general  principle  that  the  Court  will  not  grant  the  writ  where 
there  is  any  other  specific  legal  remedy  must  be  understood  sub  modo, 
for  if  the  other  remedy  be  obsolete  or  inconvenient,  as  in  the  case  of  an 
assize  for  an  office,  the  Court  will  grant  the  writ.(p)  The  offices  to  which 
such  a  proceeding  is  incident  are  generally  such  as  are  created  by  letters 
*patcnt.(2')  Upon  this  point  the  Court  has  often  said,  in  answer  to  r^on-i 
those  particular  cases  in  which  an  assize  lies,  that  though  a  party 
has  such  remedy,  yet  it  is  not  obsolete,  and  therefore  an  exception  has 
been  made  in  those  instances,(7)  it  being  discretionary  in  the  Court  either 
to  grant  or  refuse  the  writ  in  such  cases. (s) 

The  following  is  a  list,  alphabetically  arranged,  of  those  legal  formulae, 
the  existence  of  which,  as  prescribed  remedies,  bar  the  dispensation  of 
the  writ  of  mandamus  : — 

Action.  Where  there  is  no  specific  legal  remedy,  the  Court  of  B.  R. 
will  grant  a  mandamus  to  enforce  the  general  law  of  the  land,  that  there- 
by justice  may  be  done.  But  where  an  action  will  lie  for  complete  satis- 
faction equivalent  to  a  specific  relief,  the  Court  will  not  so  interfere. (;) 
Thus,  where  A.  had  pulled  down  a  party  wall,  and  thereby  destroyed  the 
internal  decorations  of  his  next  neighbour's  house,  and  afterwards  rebuilt 

(/)  R.  V.  Norwich  Eailwaj-,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  2  4,  Q.  B.     S.  C.  3  D.  &  L.  385. 

\k)  Richards  v.  Dylce,  3  Q'.  B.  267, f  per  Patteson,  J. 

\l)  R.  T.  Dursley,  (Churchwardens),  6  N.  &  M.  SSY.f     S.  C.  5  A.  &  E.  lO.f 

(m)  R.  V.  Severn  Railway,  2  B.  &  Aid.  64G.  R.  v.  Wiltshire  Canal,  5  N.  &  M. 
348.t  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  483.f  Dr.  Aslcew's  case,  Burr.  218G,  2191.  R.  v.  Blooer, 
Bur.  1045.     R.  v.  Barlver,  Burr.  1266.     R.  v.  Cambridge,  (V.  C.)  Burr.  1659,  1660. 

(w)  R.  V.  Nottingham  Water  Works,  1  N.  &  P.  480.f  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  355.f  S. 
C.  W.  W.  &  D.  166;  2  B.  &  Aid.  646. 

(o)  R.  V.  Birmingham,  (Rector)  7  A.  &  E.  259,   260.f 

(jo)  1  T.  R.  399  ;  3  T.  R.  650,  supra.  Anon.  Comb.  347 ;  Stra,  1082,  n.  (1).  R. 
V.  O.xcnden,  1  Show.  219;  Burr.  1265.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (C.  2.)  See  tit. 
"College,"  (Master,  Restoration.)  See  also  Town  Cleric  of  Oxon's  case,  Comb. 
244.     R.  V.  Westminster  (Dean),  Comb.  244 ;  3  T.  R.  652,  per  Grose,  J. 

{q)  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  404.  R.  v.  Severn  Railway,  2  B.  &  A.  646,  648. 
See  post,  tit.  "  Office." 

(?■)  3  T.  R.  646. 

(s)  R.  V.  Blooer,  Burr.  1043,  1046;  3  T.  R.  651,  perKenyon,  C.  J. 

{t)  R.  V.  England,  (Bank)  2  Doug.  526.     R.  v.  Chester,  (Ep.)  1  T.  R.  396.     R.  v. 


72  tapping's    mandamus. 

the  wall,  but  neglected  to  replace  the  decorations,  the  court  held  that  it 
was  not  competent  for  the  person  so  injured  to  enforce,  by  mandamus, 
the  reinstatement  of  his  apartments  under  stat.  14  Geo.  3,  c.  78,  s.  41, 
because  his  remedy  was  by  action. (?<)  So  the  Court  has  refused  a  visitor 
to  exercise  his  visitatorial  power  over  the  temporalities  of  a  cathedral 
church  concerning  the  intermediate  profits  during  the  vacancy  of  a  stall, 
such  being  a  matter  proper  for  an  action  at  law.(t') 

It  has  been  decided  that  a  remedy  by  the  following  actions  is  sufficient 
for  the  Court  to  refuse  the  writ,  namely,  an  action  on  the  case,(w)or 
special  assumpsit :  thus  it  was  refused  to  compel  the  Bank  of  England  to 
transfer  stock,  because  such  action  was  the  proper  and  specific  remedy,(a;) 
so  also  an  action  of  dcbt,(_y)  or  those  of  trover  *or  detinue. (.:)  Thus 
'-'■-'  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  refuse  to  grant  a  writ  of  mandamus  to 
command  the  delivery  up  of  muniments  belonging  to  one  as  annexed  to 
his  office,  against  one  not  claiming  them  ex  officio,  for  the  former  may 
bring  detinue  or  trover  for  them.  So  such  Court  will  not  command 
churchwardens  to  deliver  a  vestry  book  to  a  vestry  clerk. (a) 

A  remedy  by  ejectment  is  also  a  bar  to  the  issuing  of  the  writ.(i)  And 
in  the  case  of  an  office,  it  is  sufficient  to  bar  the  dispensation  of  the  writ, 
if  by  refusing  to  pay  the  fees  thereof,  or  by  bringing  an  action  against  the 
officer  if  he  take  them,(r)  the  title  to  the  office  may  be  tried. 

Amercement.  A  remedy  by  amercement  has  also  been  held  to  be  a 
sufficient  remedy  to  discharge  the  writ.  Thus,  a  rule  for  a  mandamus 
obtained  by  the  Conservators  of  the  Bedford  Level,  against  persons  liable 
ratione  tenurce  to  repair  the  banks  of  the  Ouse,  was  discharged,  on  a  pre- 
liminary objection,  that  by  stat.  15  Car.  2,  c.  17,  the  applicants  were 
Commissioners  of  Sewers,  and  might,  therefore,  put  in  force  against 
the  defendants  another  remedy,  namely,  amerce  those  who  neglected  to 
repair.(rf) 

Hopkins,  4  P.  &  D.  550.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  550-1  R.  r.  Severn.  Railway,  2  B.  &  Aid. 
648.  R.  V.  Ponsford,  1  D.  &  L.  116.  R.  v.  Stoke  Damerel,  5  A.  &  E.""  SSO.f  S.  C. 
1  N.  &  P.  56.  Ex  parte  Robins,  7  D.  566 ;  1  W.  W.  &  H.  578  ;  3  Jur.  103.  R.  v. 
York,  (J.)  1  N.  &  M.  lll.f  R.  v.  Whitstable  Fishery,  7  East,  353.  R.  y.  Hull 
Railway,  8  Jur.  491.  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  L.  257,  Q.  B.'  See  tit.  "Compensation," 
(Company.)  (w)  1  D.  &  L.  116  supra.     S.  C.12  L.  J.,  X.  S.  313,  Q.  B. 

(f)  R.  y.  Dunelmensem,  Burr.  567. 

{w)  Sayill's  case,  Sid.  443.  R.  v.  Chester,  (Ep.)  1  T.  R.  398  ;  2  T.  R.  188  n.  (J). 
R.  y.  England,  (Bank)  2  Doug.  524.  R.  y.  Dr.  Askew,  Burr.  2186.  R.  y.  Water- 
works, (Nottingham),  1  N.  &  P.  485.1  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  355.f  But  see  Stra.  1082. 
Bac.  abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  2.     See  tit.  "  College,"  (Master.) 

(x)  SaviU's  case,  Sid.  443  ;  Doug.  526,  supra.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.) 

(?/)  R.  y.  Hull  Railway,  6  Q.  B.  76.t  S.  C.  8  Jur.  491.  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  257, 
Q.  B.     See  Infra,  "  Fees  Withholding,"  and  tit.  "  Office." 

(z)  R.  V.  Hopkins,  1  Q.  B.  lei.f     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  550. 

(«)  Anon.,  2  Chit.  255.f 

(6)  R.  y.  Chester.  (Ep.  1  Wils,  209,  per  Law,  C.  J.  R.  y.  Stainforth  Canal,  1  M. 
&  S.  31.     R.  y.  Agardsley,  (Manor.)  5  D.  19,  and  cases  there  cited. 

(c)  R.  V.  Stoke  Damerel,  (Minister)  5  A.  &  E.  589.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  56.t  2  II. 
&  W.  346.     See  post,  tit.  "  Office." 

{d)  R.  V.  Gamble  3  P.  &  D.  122.  S.  C.  11  A.  &  E.  72.+  And  see  5  A.  &  E. 
584.     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  56.t  supra. 


LEGAL     PRINCIPLES,      ETC.  73 

Appeal.  The  Court  will  uot  grant  the  writ  if  there  be  a  remedy  by 
appeal,(e)  exclusively  vested  in  any  person  or  corporation. (/) 

Case.  Where  the  sessions  have  granted  a  case  for  the  Court  of  B.  R. 
such  a  course,  in  general,  estops  an  application  for  a  mandamus  to  com- 
mand such  sessions  to  hear.(i/) 

Distress.  Where  there  is  a  power  to  distrain,  such  remedy  must  be 
resorted  to,  and  the  Court  will  refuse  to  interfere  in  any  ease  for  which 
*such  a  proceeding  is  an  available  remedy  -.Qi)  and  where  a  remedy  ^  ^^o  n 
as  by  distress  is  expressly  given  by  act  of  Parliament,  it  seems 
that  the  writ  will  be  granted  to  command  the  issuing  of  such  distress, 
notwithstanding  there  may  be  a  remedy  by  indictment. (i) 

Ecclesiastical  Jurisdiction.  The  Court  cannot  interpose  and  grant  the 
writ,  where  its  object  is  purely  Ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  and  remedy;  nor 
correct  errors  in  its  proceedings.  Thus  it  lies  not  to  command  the  ad- 
mission of  a  proctor,  nor  the  making  of  a  church-rate,  independent  of 
statute ;  nor  as  to  the  mode  of  burial  of  dead ;  the  setting-up  of  bells ; 
the  purchase  of  books,  vestments,  &c.,  necessary  for  divine  service,(7)  for 
the  Court  of  B.  R.,  being  without  judicial  knowledge  on  such  subjects, 
has  no  jurisdiction. 

Equity.     Where  a  legal  right  exists,  it  is  no  answer  to  an  application  ' 
for  a  mandamus,  to  show  that  there  is  also  a  remedy  in  equity ;  for  when 
the  Court  refuses  to  grant  the  writ,  because  there  is  another  specific 
remedy,  it  means  a  specific  remedy  at  Iaiv.{k) 

But  if  the  Court  of  Chancery  have  full  jurisdiction,  as  in  a  matter  of 
title  to  an  estate,  and  be  a  fitter  tribunal  for  the  investigation,  the  Court 
will  refuse  the  writ.  Thus,  where  under  stat.  11  Geo.  4  &  1  Wm.  4, 
c.  60,  s.  8,  the  Court  of  Chancery,  upon  a  Master's  report,  made  an  order 

(e)  R.  V.  Appleford,  2  Keb.  864,  per  Hale,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Cambridge,  (U.)  8  Jlod. 
150.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1334.  S.  C.  Stra.  557.  S.  C.  Fort.  202.  See  R.  v.  East 
India  Company,  4  M.  &  S.  279.  R.  v.  Weolby,  Stra.  1259.  R.  v.  Harrison,  16  L. 
J.,  N.  S.  33,  M.  C.  R.  V.  Gray's  Inn,  1  Doug.  353.  R.  t.  Lincoln's  Inn,  4  B.  &  C. 
855.f     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man,"  C.  2.     See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions." 

(/)  Gude's,  Cr.  Pr.  180.  (^)  See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions,"  (Case.) 

(h)  R.  V.  London  Railway,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  42,  Q.  B.  See  tit.  "  Compensation," 
(Company.)     See  infra,  "  Execution." 

(i)  R.  V.  Hants,  (J.)  1  B.  &  Ad.  658.f  R.  t.  Robinson,  Burr.  799,  and  cases  tliere 
cited.     See  tit.  "  Distress." 

(j)  See  tits.  "  Proctor,"  "  Churchrate,"  "Burial,"  "Courts  Superior;"  (q.  b.)  ; 
Sel.  N.  P.  1087,  11  edit.,  and  infra,  tit.  "Equity."  R.  v.  St.  Peters,  5  T.  R.  364; 
4  M.  &  S.  250.  R.  V.  Taylor,  1  Burn's  Ecc.  Law,  258.  R.  v.  Coleridge,  2  B.  &  A. 
806,  per  Abbott,  C.  J.  Lee  v.  Oxenden,  3  Salk.  229,  4  ;  1  Salk.  38,  6. 

(k)  R.  V.  Stafford,  (Marquis)  3  T.  R.  651,  652,  per  Buller,  J.;  8  East,  219.  R.  r. 
London  Assurance  Company,  5  B.  &  A.  901.  S.  C.  1  D.  &  R.  510.  R.  v.  Rennett, 
2  T.  R.  198.  R.  V.  Whitstable  Fisliery,  7  East,  353.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  See 
also  AVilkins  v.  Mitchell,  3  Salk.  229.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  348,  and  note.  See  post, 
tit.  "Ajjplication." 


74  tapping's    mandamus. 

declaring  that  the  heir  of  W.,  legal  tenant  in  fee  of  copyhold  premises, 
could  not  be  found ;  that  W.  held  as  trustee,  and  that  B.  was  entitled  to 
the  equitable  fee,  and  appointing  G.  trustee  to  convey  or  surrender  the 
legal  estate;  the  Court  refused  to  comnumd  the  lord  by  mandamus,  to 
accept  Cr.'s  surrender,  on  the  ground,  assuming  the  statute  to  apply  to 
copyholds,  that  the  Court  of  Chancery  could  compel  the  performance  of 
whatever  was  requisite,  and  was  better  able  than  the  Court  of  B.  R.  to 
r*OQ  I  regulate  the  rights  of  the  *parties.(/)  So  also  as  the  examination 
of  the  accounts  of  a  trading  company,  may  be  effectually  entered 
into  in  the  Court  of  Chancery,  and  as  the  Court  of  B.  E,.  is  a  very  unfit 
tribunal  for  such  purpose,  such  latter  Court  will  refuse  to  interfere  by 
mandamus  with  such  a  case.(7?i) 

So  where  it  appears  by  the  affidavits  on  showing  cause,  that  the  right 
respecting  which  the  mandamus  is  sought,  is  already  the  subject  of  a  suit 
in  equity  between  the  parties,  the  Court  will  not  interfere  and  grant  such 
writ.(y() 

While  upon  this  point,  a  few  words  may  be  advantageously  said  as  to 
the  important  subject 

Lis  j^cndens.  It  is  a  principle  of  law,  that  where  a  matter  is  in  con- 
troversy before  a  competent  jurisdiction,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  in- 
terfere by  mandamus. (o)  Such  a  fact  will,  therefore,  found  a  good  return. 
Thus,  where  a  mandamus  was  moved  for  to  license  one  to  teach  in  a 
school,  it  was  refused,  because  a  caveat  in  the  Spiritual  Court  was  de- 
pending. So  a  mandamus  to  swear  in  a  deputy  registrar  of  the  Consistory 
Court  of  York,  was  refused,  because  there  was  a  matter  in  the  case  in 
controversy  in  Chancery  ;(^^)  but  on  the  contrary,  where  the  matter  is 
not  being  discussed  before  a  competent  tribunal,  such  lis  pendens  will  not 
form  a  good  return.  (5-) 

Error.  So  if  a  writ  of  error  lie,  the  Court  will  not  grant  a  manda- 
mus, (/■)  as  it  is  a  specific  legal  remedy. 

Execution.  "Where  the  writ  of  Jl.  fa.,  ca.  sa.,  &c.  are  applicable  as 
executions,  the  Court  will  refuse  the  writ.(s)    Thus,  where  the  prosecutor 

(Z)  R.  T.  Pitt,  10  A.  &.  E.  2T2.f  S.  C.  2  P.  &.  D.  385.  See  tit.  "Manor,"  (Surren- 
(der). 

(?«)  R.  T.  England  (Bank),  2  B.  &  A.  620.  See  tit.  "England,"  (Bank). 

(n)  R.  V.  Wheeler,  Cas.  t.  Hard.,  by  Lee,  98.  S.  C.  Cunn.  155. 

(0)  R.  V.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  U.  S.  C.  Stra.  1192.  Anon.,  5  Mod.3V4.  But  see 
1  T.  R.  403,  citing  Stra.  893-G  ;  Fitz.  194.  And  see  R.  r.  Wheeler,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  100, 
n.  (1)  ;  7  Mod.  218,  citing  Raine's  case,  5  Mod.  54.  See  tits.  "Administration," 
"  Will,"  (Lis  pendens). 

{p)  See  Vincent's  case,  P.  13,  G.  1. 

(q)  R.  V.  Harris,  1  W.  Blac.  450.  S.  C.  Burr.  1420.  See  tit.  "  Return." 

(r)  Ex  parte  Morgan,  2  Chit.  250  ;  3  A.  &  E.  721.1  And  see  tit.  "  Courts  Inferior," 
(New  Trial,)  (Judgment,)  &c.,  R.  v.  Conyngham,  1  D.  &  R.  529.f  S.  C.  5  B.  &  A. 
885 

(.s)  R.  V.  Victoria  Park,  1  Q.  B.  288.t  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  639.  R.  v.  Hull  Railway, 
13  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  Q.  B.,  257.  Wilkins  v.  Mitchell,  2  Salk.  228.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  348. 
See  post, tit.  "Company,"  (Execution). 


LEGAL      PRINCIPLES,     ETC.  75 

seeks  only  the  payment  of  debt  and  costs,  for  tliis,  an  execution  hy  fi.  fa. 
is  a  perfect  remedy  in  its  nature,  and  if  in  such  a  case  the  writ  were  to 
be  granted,  because  there  happened  to  be  no  ^chattels  scizable,  it  _  ^^y.  -, 
would  be  difficult,  on  principle,  to  refuse  it,  in  any  case  where  the 
sheriff  should  return  nulla  bona.(/) 

Fees,  loithholding.  Where  the  case  is  doubtful  on  the  merits,  and 
the  applicant  can  try  his  right  to  the  office,  &c.,  by  maintaining  an 
action  for,  or  withholding  the  fees  thereof^  the  Court  will  refuse  the 
writ.(») 

Feigned  Issue.  A  feigned  issue  when  prescribed  as  the  specific  legal 
remedy,  is  sufficient  to  prevent  the  granting  of  the  writ.(w) 

Indictment.  It  is  true,  as  before  stated, (io)  that  a  mandamus  will  issue 
where  there  is  a  legal  remedy,  in  cases  where  that  remedy  is  not  so  con- 
venient, complete,  or  beneficial  as  a  mandamus  would  enforce,  but  such 
doctrine  is  applied  to  those  cases  only  where  the  remedy  is  not  in  its 
nature  so  complete,  without  reference  to  any  circumstances  peculiar  to  the 
case  in  which  it  might  be  used. (a;)  Thus  a  mandamus  has  been  granted 
to  compel  a  corporation  to  reinstate  and  lay  down  a  railway  constructed 
under  the  authority  of  an  act  of  Parliament,  although  an  indictment 
would  have  lain  for  the  non-repair;  for  the  only  direct  effect  of  an  indict- 
ment in  such  a  case,  would  have  been  the  punishment  of  the  defendants 
by  fine,  and  not  the  procuration  for  the  prosecutors  of  the  benefit  which 
they  sought,  and  were  entitled  to.(?/)  So  in  all  cases  where  the  relief  is 
sought  against  an  artificial  person  or  corporation ;  for  if  it  be  convicted 
upon  an  indictment,  the  Court  can  only  impose  a  fine  upon  it,  which  fine 
may,  it  is  true,  be  levied  by  distress  upon  its  tangible  property;  yet  cases 
may  occur  where  such  its  property  may  be  so  small,  that  it  may  submit 
to  the  payment  of  the  fine,  and  still  not  do  the  thing  required.  In  such 
a  case,  the  remedy  is  clearly  neither  so  speedy  nor  so  effectual  as  that  by 
mandamus. (--) 

So  in  cases  in  which  commissioners  or  other  public  officers  are  in- 
dicted for  not  obeying  an  order  of  sessions  directing  them  to  do  certain 
public  acts,  as  to  set  out  a  road,  as  a  public  road,  an  indictment  would 
not  be  a  specific  remedy,  i.  e.  such  a  remedy  as  the  case  demands ;  for 

(t)  4  P.  &  D.  G42.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  291,f  R.  v.  Margate  Pier,  3  B.  &  A.  223. 

(m)  R.  v.  Stoke  Damerel  (Minister),  5  A.  &  E.  584.f  Ante,  p.  21. 

M  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  2.  R.  v.  Street,  8  Mod.  99  ;  2  Chitt.  255.f 

[w)  Ante,  p.  19. 

{x)  R.  V.  Victoria  Park,  4  P.  &  D.  642.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  291,t  per  Denman,  C.J.  R.  v. 
Nottingham  (Waterworks,)  6  A.  &  E.  355.f    S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  480.f 

(y)  R.  V.  Severn  Railway,  2  B.  &  A.  G46.  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway.  10  A. 
&  E.  5GG.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48. 

(z)  R.  V.  Severn  Railway,  2  B.  &  A.  G49.     See  ante,  p.  18,  19. 


76  tapping's     MANDAMUS. 

P^.^r  1  an  indictment  is  only  a  proceeding  in  poenam  for  the  *past,  and 
'-  ""^  not  a  remedy  for  the  future,  and  therefore  not  so  efficacious  a 
remedy  as  mandamus,  (o) 

Again,  the  procedure  by  indictment  does  not  terminate  the  question, 
for  it  may  be  dehiyed  by  certiorari,  and  the  prosecutor  is  not  entitled  to 
costs  from  the  county;  whereas  a  mandamus  is  a  festinum  remedium,(5) 
and  the  Court  has  a  discretionary  power  as  to  the  costs  by  stat.  1  Wm.  4, 
c.  21,  s.  G.(r) 

So  where  an  indictment  is  merely  a  concurrent  remedy,  the  Court  will 
grant  the  writ.((-/)  Thus  where  a  remedy  as  by  distress  is  expressly  given 
by  act  of  Parliament,  it  seems  that  a  mandamus  will  be  granted  to  com- 
mand the  issuing  of  such  distress,  notwithstanding  there  may  be  a  remedy 
by  indictment. (e) 

The  test,  however  is,  whether  the  writ  or  the  indictment  is  the  more 
effectual  rcmedy.{f^  Therefore,  in  all  cases  where  an  indictment  is  a 
remedy  equally  convenient,  beneficial,  and  effectual  in  its  nature  as  a 
mandamus,  or  in  other  words  is  the  proper  remedy,  the  Court  will  not 
grant  such  writ.  Thus  an  indictment  is  the  specific  remedy  to  compel 
the  repair  of  a  public  road,  and  for  such  purpose  is  a  remedy  well  known 
to  the  law,  and  in  constant  Vi%Q.{cj)  So  in  many  other  cases,  the  remedy 
by  indictment  has  been  treated  as  a  sufficient  and  a  specific  remedy. 
Thus  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  to  command  the 
treasurer  of  a  county  to  obey  an  order  of  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions, 
there  being  no  collusion  on  the  part  of  such  sessions,  for  the  proper 
remedy  in  case  of  his  refusal  to  obey  it,  is  by  indictment.  (A) 

r  *or  -1  "^Quare  Impedit.  It  is  clearly  settled,  that  if  a  quare  impedit 
*-  "  lie,  and  be  the  proper  remedy,  a  mandamus  does  not,  and  will 
therefore  be  refused,  (i)     Thus  it  has  been  refused  to  command  a  bishop 

(a)  2  B.  &  A.  C49.  E.  v.  Dean  Inclosure,  2  M.  &  S.  80.  And  see  R.  v.  Jeyes,  5 
N.  &  M.  104.f  S.  C.  3  A.  &.  E.  416,f  where  it  is  stated  that  Lord  Ellenborough— 2 
M.  &  S.  80 — was  the  first  who  settled  that  an  indictment  is  not  always  sufficient  to 
withstand  a  mandamus;  5  A.  &  E.  811,1  n.  [b] ;  10  A.  &  E.  566.f  S.  C.  4  P. 
&  D.  48. 

(b)  See  p.  4,  n.  {b).  [c)  3  A.  &  E.  421.f  See  tit.  "  Costs." 

\d)  R.  V.  Severn  Railway,  the  authority  of  which  was  doubted  in  11  A.  &  E. 
69-1  S.  C.  3  P.  &.  D.  112  ;  2  B.  &  A.  G50.  R.  v.  Bristol  Dock,  2  Q.  B.  64.1  S.  C.  1  G. 
&  D.  286,  289;  2  M.  &  S.  84.  Ex  parte  Robins,  7  D.  566.  1  W.  W.  &  H.  STS.  3 
Jur.  103. 

(e)  R.  V.  Hants  (J.),  1  B.  &  Ad.  658. f  R.  v.  Robinson,  Burr.  799,  and  cases  there 
cited.  See  supra,  "  Distress." 

(/•)  2  B.  &A.  644;  5  N.  &  M.  104.f  S.  C.  3  A.  &.  E.  416.f  R.  t.  Dean  Inclosure, 
2  II.  &  S.  84. 

(^)See  tit.  "Highway,"  (Setting  out).  R.V.Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  404.  R.  v. 
Severn  Railway,  2  B.  &  A.  648.  R.  v.  Dean  Inclosure,  2  M.  &.  S.  20.  R.  v.  Margate 
Pier,  3  B.  &  A.  223.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 

(h)  R.  V.  Jeyes,  5  N.  &  M.  101  .f  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  416.f  R.  v.  Bristow,  6  T.  R.  168  ; 
1  Chit.  650-1  R.  V.  Johnson,  4  M.  &  S.  515,  cited  in  R.  v.  Payn,  1  N.  &  P.  528.1 
S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  392  ;f  2  M.  &  S.  20,  supra.  See  tit.  "  County,"  (Treasurer). 

li)  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396,  399,  n.(rf);  Stra.  1082.  R.  v.  Staflbrd  (Mar- 
quis), 3  T.  R.  649.  R.  v.  St.  Peter's  Exeter,  12  A.  &  E.  527.1  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  252. 
See  tits.  "  Canons,"  "  Curacy,"  (Augmented),  (Perpetual). 


LEGAL     PRINCIPLES,     ETC. 


77 


to  license  the  curate  of  an  augmented  curacy  where  there  is  a  cross  nomi- 
nation, because  the  party  has  another  specific  legal  remedy  by  quare  impe- 
dit.(y)  So  on  a  commission  of  charitable  use,  it  was  agreed  between  the 
lord  of  the  manor  of  A.  and  the  inhabitants  of  W.  within  the  manor,  that 
certain  copyhold  lands  should  be  let  for  the  maintenance  of  a  stipendiary 
curate  of  the  chapel  of  W.,  to  be  nominated  by  a  majority  of  the  inhabi- 
tants, and  to  be  allowed  by  the  said  lord,  and  by  him  presented  to  the 
ordinary  for  a  license  to  preach;  the  usage  of  nominating,  &c.  had  been 
pursuant  to  the  agreement;  the  lord  having  refused  to  allow  and  present 
the  nominee  of  a  majority  of  the  inhabitants,  the  latter  prayed  a  man- 
damus, which  the  Court  of  B.  K.  refused,  holding  that  their  right  was 
either  a  mere  trust,  and  then  their  remedy  was  in  equity,  or  a  legal  right, 
and  properly  the  subject  of  a  quare  impedit.(7i:)  In  one  case,  however, 
the  writ  was  granted  to  admit  to  a  canonry ;  but  it  does  not  appear  that 
there  was  a  disturbance  of  the  right  of  patronage. (0 

Quo  loarranto.  The  Court  will  refuse  to  grant  the  writ  of  mandamus 
if  it  appear  that  the  applicant  has  a  remedy  by  information  in  the  nature 
of  a  quo  warranto.  Thus  a  rule  for  a  mandamas  to  admit  a  recorder  was 
refused,  because  it  appeared  there  was  a  recorder  de  facto,  and  therefore 
that  the  applicant  had  such  a  remedy. (wi)  For  the  consequence  of  grant- 
ing a  rule  in  such  a  case,  would  be  that  a  second  person  would  be  admitted 
to  an  office  already  filled  by  another,  both  claiming  to  be  duly  elected. («) 
So  where  persons  declared  to  be  duly  elected  municipal  officers  have 
accepted  the  office,  and  made  the  proper  ^'declaration ;  it  then  ^  ^^gy  ] 
being  prima  facie  full,  they  can  only  be  removed  by  a  quo  war- 
ranto information ;  therefore  a  mandamus  does  not  lie  to  admit  other  can- 
didates who  are  alleged  to  have  had  a  majority  of  votes, (o)  unless  such 
election  be  clearly  void.(p)  So  if  a  party  have  been  ousted  of  an  office 
by  the  election  of  another  person  to  that  office  (the  election  not  being 
merely  colourable,)  but  prima  facie  fide  bona  fide,  his  remedy  is  not  by 
mandamus,  but  by  an  information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto.  (</)  For 
if  the  election  be  merely  doubtful,  and  therefore  fit  to  be  tried  upon  an 

[j)  1  T.  R.  396,  supra.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.)  Bac.  Abr.  tit  "Man."  C.  2. 
See  tit.  "  Curacy,"  (Augmented). 

(k)  R.  V.  Stafford  (Marquis),  3  T.  R.  646.    See  tit.  "Trust." 

(Z)  Clarlie  v.  Sarum  (Ep.),  Stra.  1082.  The  authority  of  this  case  is  questioned 
in  a  note  to  the  3rd  edition,  and  also  denied  in  Bowcll  v.  Milbank,  1  T.  R.  309,  n. 
{d).  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  306,  and  Powell  t.  Kilburn,  3  Wils.  355.  But  sec 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  2.  See  tit.  "  Canons." 

[m)  R.  v.  Colchester  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  259.  R.  v.  Winchester  (Mayor),  7  A.  &  E. 
220.+  S.  C.  2  N.  &.  P.  274.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  1  N.  &.  P.  4V9.t  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E. 
467-1  R.  V.  Chester  (Mayor),  1  M.  &  S.  102.  R.  v.  Atwood,  4  B.  &  Ad.  481,  482,t 
and  cases  there  cited.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.  2.  See  tit.  "Recorder." 

(n)  R.  V.  Bedford  Level  (Corp.),  6  East,  360. 

(o)  2  N.  &  P.  274.  S.  C.  7  A.  &  E.  215,t  supra.  R.v.  Derby  (Councillors),  2  N.  & 
P.  589.     S.  C.  7  A.  &  E.  419.t 

(»)  See  tit.  "  Office,"  (Election).  ^  ,    . , 

(q)  R.  V.  Oxford  (Mayor),  1  N.  &  P.  479-1  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  349-1  per  Coleridge, 
J-;  4  T-  R.  009;  3  A.  &  E.  467,t  supra.  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Election). 


78  tapping's    mandamus. 

inforuuition  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto,  the  Court  ought  not,  nor 
will  it  grant  a  mandamus;  but  if  it  be  a  mere  colourable  election,  and 
clearly  void,  it  ought  to  and  will  grant  it.(r) 

There  are,  however,  numerous  cases  in  which  the  Court  has  granted  a 
mandamus,  notwithstanding  a  remedy  existed  by  quo  warranto  informa- 
tion.(.s)  Thus,  if  one  be  ousted  from  an  office  and  another  elected  in  his 
stead,  and  such  election  be  merely  colourable,  a  mandamus  will  go  to 
permit  the  ousted  party  to  exercise  his  office;  but  as  the  law  holds  such 
colourable  election  to  be  void,  the  mandamus  will  not  be  to  restore  but  to 
permit  the  exercise  of  the  office. (/) 

The  Court  will  however,  in  some  cases,  grant  a  mandamus,  although 
the  title  of  the  officer  to  whom  the  mandamus  is  directed  is  questioned 
by  the  pendency  of  an  information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto,  for 
it  may  be  collusive ;  but  if  the  prosecutor  of  the  quo  warranto  be  also 
the  applicant  for  the  mandamus,  it  is  otherwise.  («)  It  seems  also,  that 
it  has  been  considered  that  a  quo  warranto  information  and  a  mandamus 
may  be  concurrent  remedies. (r) 

If,  however,  a  quo  warranto  does  not  lie,  then  mandamus  will.(j/7) 

Quality  of  Prosecutor  s  Rvjlit  to  the  Writ. 

The  prosecutor  must  be  clothed  with  a  clear  legal(x)   and  equitable 
^,-)Q -|  right  to  something  which  is  properly  the  subject  of  the  writ,(3^) 
^   ^       as  a  legal  right  by  virtue  of  an  act  of  Parliament.  (2)     But  what- 
ever the  quality  of  the  right  maybe,  the  Court  will  see  it  clearly  substan- 
tiated by  affidavits  before  they  will  grant  the  writ,(o)  and  if  they  arc  not 

(r)  R.  V.  Banks,  Burr.  1454.  R.  v.  Colchester  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  2G0.  See  tit. 
"  Office,"  (Election). 

(.?)  R.  T.  Stoke  Damerel  (Minister),  1  X.  k  P.  oT.f  S.  C.  5  A.  &  E.  584.f 

\t)  R.  T.  O.xford,  6  A.  &  E.  349.1  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  474,f  and  cases  there  cited.  R. 
V.  Colchester  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  260. 

(m)  R.  t.  Grampond  (Mayor),  6  T.  R.  301,  302,  and  see  R.  v.  Dr.  Hay,  Burr. 
2295. 

(y)  R.  T.  Bedford  Level,  6  East,  36?,  per  Lawrence,  J.,  and  see  2  B.  &  A.  649. 
See  "Indictment,"  p. 25. 

(w)  3  A.  &  E.  472,t  supra. 

(r)  R.  V.  Nottingham  Water  Works,  1  N.  &  P.  480.f  S.  C.  6  A.  &.  E.  SSS.f  W. 
W.  &  D.  166.  R.  V.  Lincoln's  Inn,  7  D.  &  R.  368,f  per  Holroyd,  J.  R.  v.  Worcester 
Canal,  1  M.  &  R.  533.  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396.  R.  v.  Bristol  Dock,  12  East, 
429.  R.  T.  Coleridge,  1  Chit.  592.1  R  .v.  Clear,  7  D.  &  R.  393.t  S.  C.  4  B.  &  C.  899,t 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (D).  R.  v.  Jotham,  3  T.  R.  575.  R.  v.  Bridgeveater,  1  N.  &  P. 
466.1  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  339.1  R.  v  Stafiford  (Marquis),  3  T.  R.  651.  R.  v.  London 
Assurance  Company,  5  B.  &  A.  901. f  R.  v.  Portsmouth  (Mayor).  3  B.  &  C.  152.t 
S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  767'.t  R.  v.  West  Looe  (.Mayor),  3  B.  &  C.  677.1  S.  C.  5  D.  &  R. 
590.t  R.  V.  Barnard's  Inn,  5  A.  &.  E.  24.t  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  8  East,  216. 
Ex  parte  King,  7  East,  90.  R.  v.  North  Riding  (J.),  2  B.  &  C.  290.f  R.  v.  Eastern 
Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  557.t  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.  As  to  the  applicants  for 
the  writ,  sec  tit.  "  Application,"  post. 

Ui)  R.  V.  Wiicelcr,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  100.  S.  C.  Cunn.  155.  R.  v.  Stafford  (Marquis), 
3  f.  R.  646.  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396.  R.  t.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  W.  Bl.  25,  n. 
(o).  R.  V.  Ottery  St.  Mary,  3  G.  &  D.  383.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  157.t  R-  v.  West  Riding 
(J.),  3  N.  &  M.  88.t  Ex  parte  Ricketts,  4  A.  &  E.  999.1  S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  523.t 

{z\  R.  T.  Treasury  Lords,  4  A.  &  E.  981.1  See  tit.  "Act  of  Parliament." 

(a)  R.  V.  Ileyward,  1  M.  &  S.  628  ;  see  post,  tit.  "Application,"  (Affidavits). 


TUE      SUBJECTS,     ETC.  79 

SO  satisfied,  they  will  refuse  it.(h)  Tims  where  a  charter  does  not  require 
the  members  of  a  corporation  to  be  resident,  the  Court  will  not  by  man- 
damus command  such  corporation  to  meet  and  consider  the  propriety  of 
removing  from  their  offices  the  non-resident  corporators,  unless  their  ab- 
sence has  been  productive  of  some  serious  inconvenience. (r)  So  where  a 
decree  in  Chancery  had,  in  1741,  declared  the  right  of  voting  to  be  in 
those  inhabitants  who  paid  rates  and  assessments ;  and  the  usage  since 
that  decree  had  been  in  accordance  with  it;  an  election  having  been  made 
by  such  inhabitants,  at  which  the  votes  of  non-rated  inhabitants  were  ten- 
dered and  refused,  the  Court  refused  to  grant  a  mandamus  for  anew  elec- 
tion, as  the  parties  applying  for  it  had  made  out  no  case  to  show  that  the 
term  "  inhabitants"  used  in  the  charter  had  a  wider  signification. (cZ) 

The  prosecutor  must  fulfil  every  legal  requirement  necessary  to  the 
obtaining  of  such  writ.((-) 

0/  those  suhject  to  (he    ]Vrit. 

*The  applicant  must  not  only  show  that  he  is  both  legally  and 
equitably  entitled  to  some  right  properly  the  subject  of  the  writ,  L  -*-J 
but  must  shcv.'  that  it  is  legally  demandable  from  the  person  to  whom 
such  writ  nii'.st  bo  directed, (/)  otherwise  the  Court  will  refuse  to  interfere; 
and  although  the  Court  is  aware  of  the  extreme  inconvenience  of  oblieiug: 
a  prosecutor  to  seek  his  relief  in  a  Court  of  Equity  ;  yet  it  will  refuse  the 
writ  if  it  entertain  a  doubt  whether  the  defendants  have  legal  capacity  to 
fulfil  the  writ.(r/) 

2nd.     The  Subjects,  alpliahcticalJy  arranged,  as  to  which  the  Writ  has 
been  either  granted  or  denied. 

The  following  is  an  alphabetical,  and,  it  is  presumed,  a  complete  series, 
of  the  subjects  which  have  from  time  to  time  been  decided  by  the  Court 
of  a.  li.,  to  be  either  within  or  without  the  jurisdiction  of  the  writ  of 
mandamus.  It  is  trusted  that  the  series  will  be  found  useful  to  the 
practitioner,  as  thereby  he  will  be  enabled  to  ascertain  at  once,  how  far 

(6)  0  A.&  E.  a;]f),-}- n.  (a) 

(r-)  R.  V.  Portsmouth  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  C.  152.f  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  76T.f 

[it)  R.  V.  Sandford  (Governors),  1  N.  &  P.  328.f  Sec  tit.  "  Charter." 

{(')  R.  V.  Bond,  6  A.  &  E.  905-1    R.  v.  Bath  (Recorder),  9  A.  &  E.  874.f    S.  C.  1  P. 

&  D.  G22.    R.  T.  Deptford  Pier,  1  P.  &  D.  128.     S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  910  ;f  see  post,  tit. 

•>  Api)licatiou." 

(/)  Ante,  p.  27.    R.  v.  Liverpool,  (Customs)  2  M.  &  S.  223.    R.  v.  Ileywood,  1  M.  & 

S.  (323.     R.  T.  Exeter,  (Ep.)    2   East,  4t)4.     R.  v.  Denbiglisliire,   (J.)  14  East,  284. 

R.  V.  London,  (Ep.)l   Wils.  11.     R.  v.   Field,  &c.,  4  Tr.  R.   125.     R.  v.    London, 

(Ep.)  1  T.  R.  331.     R.  V.  Lincoln's  Inn,  4  B.  &  C.  859.f     S.  C.  7  D.  &  R.  365.f     R. 

R.  V.  London,  (Ep.)  12  East,  420;  Lord  Raym.  1205.     In  Re  Baron  De  Bode,  G  D. 

789.     R.  v.  Kent,  (J.)  9  B.  &  C.  287. f     R.  v.  Dolgelly  Union,  8  A.  &  E.  SGl.f     H. 

C.  3  N.  &  P.  542.     R.  V.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  172,  per  Keeling,  C.  J.     See  further  as  to 

those  against  whom  the  writ  may  be  obtained,  post,  "Application." 

(ff)  R.  V.  Ld.  Godolphin.  8  A.  &  E.  347-1     S.  C.     N.  &  P.  488.     See  also  R.  t. 

Middlesex,  (J.)  9  A.  &  E.  540.f     S.  C.  IP.  &D.  402.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 


80  T  A  P  P  I  N  G  '  S     M  A  N  1)  A  M  U  S. 

the  Court  has  dispensed  or  refused  the  writ,  us  to  any  subject  respecting 
which  the  interference  of  the  Court  has  been  asked  : 

AnBOT.]  Restoration. — It  docs  not  lie  to  restore  an  abbot. (r/)  In  fact 
it  has  never  been  granted  for  an  abbot,  because  he  was  an  ecclesiastical 
corporation,  and  had  a  proper  visitor,  whose  office  has  now  devolved  upon 
the  archbishop. (/^) 

*It  seems,  however,  that  formerly  the  writ  would,  in  such  a  case, 
[  -^  have  been  granted  on  account  of  the  undefined  jurisdiction  of  the 
writ.(f) 

Absolution.]  It  has  been  granted  to  commanded  a  bishop  to  obsolve 
an  excommunicated  person. («^/)  Thus  where  one  excommunicated  wished 
to  conform  to  the  orders  of  the  Church  and  to  obedience,  but  the  ecclesi- 
astical Court  refused  to  receive  him,  the  Court  of  13.  11.  granted  him  this 
writ,  commanding  such  inferior  Court  to  assoil  him.(e) 

Accounts,  &c.]  See  titles  Bank  of  England ;  Boohs,  &c. ;  Church- 
warden  (accounts)  ;  Company  {accounts)  ;  Constable  {accounts) :  Overseer 
{accounts). 

Act  of  Pabliament].  It  is  a  general  rule,  that  wherever  an  act  of 
Parliament  gives  power  to,  or  imposes  an  obligation  on,  a  particular  per- 
son, to  do  some  particular  act  or  duty,  and  provides  no  specific  legal 
remedy  on  non-performance,  the  Court  of  B.ll.  will,  in  order  to  prevent  a 
fiiilure  of  justice,  grant  ex  debito  justitiae,  a  mandamus  to  command  the 
doing  of  such  act  or  duty.(/)  But  the  Court  will  not  command  as  to  the 
manner  in  which  such  act  shall  be  done.(^) 

So  it  lies  to  command  the  performance  of  an  act  or  duty  prescribed  by 
a  local  act,  whatever  its  kind  or  nature  may  be,  unless,  as  before  stated, 
it  be  the  subject  of  a  legal  remedy. (7* ) 

It  lies  also  to  command  the  due  execution  of  the  powers  of  a  local  and 

(a)  R.  V.  London  Waterworks,  1  Lev.  123,  per  "Wyndham,  J.  See  tits.  "Monk," 
"  Knights  Templar,"  '•  Prior." 

(b)  See  Leigh's  case,  3  Mod.  334.  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Lee,  &c.,  1  Show.  252,  per 
Holt,  C.  J.  See  post,  tit.  "  Visitor." 

(c)  Middleton's  case,  1  Sid.  169,  per  Windham,  J.     See  post,  tit.  '•'  Monk." 

Id)  Anon.,  2  Rolle,  107.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)     See  post,  tit.  "  Bishop." 

(e)  Per  Montague,  C.  J.  Parish,  &c.,  St.  Balaunce  case.  Pal.  51.  See  Nat.  Brev. 
de  Cautione  admittenda.  See  also  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  165,  per  Moreton,  J.,  and 
2  Inst.  623,  for  refusing  to  assoil;  2  Keb.  168,  per  Twisden,  J. ;  Dr.  &  St.  118. 

(/)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man,"(D.).  R.  v.  Jeyes,  3  A.  &  E.  421.f  R.T.London, 
(Ep.)  1  Wils.  13.  S.  C.  Stra.  1192.  And  see  R.  v.  Middlesex,  (J.)  1  Wils. 
125.  R.  v.  Cumberland,  (.J.)  1  M.  k  S.  196.  R.  v.  Derbyshire,  (J.)  4  T.  R.  488. 
R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  6  Jur.  391  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  199;  Cas.  t.  Hard.  99;  Burr.  2189.  See 
tits.  "Arbitrator,"  "Church,"  (Rate  in  nature  of  Church-rate.) 

((/)  Ante,  n.(/). 

(/()  R.  v.  Paddington  Vestry,  9  B.  &  C.  456.1  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway, 
18  A.  &E.  54,3.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  3  A  &  E.  535.1  S.  C.  5 
N.  &  M.  222.1  R.  V.  Bristol  Dock,  1  G.  &  D.  291.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  64.t  R.  v. 
York  Railway,  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  277.  Q.  B.,  (to  make  watering  places  for  catlte.) 
Sec  4  Jur.  1060. 


THESUBJECTS,     ETC.  81 

personal  act,  which  cannot  be  compelled  by  any  specific  legal  rcmeclj(j") 
as  to  hear  the  adjournment  of  an  appeal. 

In  these  and  the  like  cases,  however,  the  Court  is  very  astute  in  seeing 
to  its  jurisdiction,(y)  because  as  on  the  one  hand  much  mischief  might 
ensue  if  the  Court  should  improvidently  enjoin  the  performance  of  things 
impracticable  or  improper,  so  on  the  other  there  is  no  higher  duty  cast  upon 
the*  Court  of  B.  R.  than  to  exercise  a  vigilant  control  over  persons  p^o-i-i 
entrusted  with  large  and  extensive  powers  for  public  purposes,  and 
to  enforce  within  reasonable  bounds,  the  exercise  of  such  powers  in  com- 
pliance with  such  purposes,  and  the  more  so  where  there  is  no  specific 
legal  remedy,  (/i;) 

They  who  come  for  and  obtain  acts  of  Parliament,  such  as  railway 
acts,  do  in  effect  undertake  that  they  will  do  and  submit  to  whatever  the 
Legislature  empowers  and  commands  them  to  do,  that  they  will  do 
nothing  elsej  and  that  they  will  do  and  forbear  all  that  they  are  thereby 
required  to  do  and  forbear,  as  well  with  reference  to  the  interests  of  the 
public  as  to  the  interests  of  individuals. (0 

There  are  also  many  cases  in  which  a  mandamus  is  granted,  as  where  a 
thing  necessary  for  the  public  safety  is  to  be  done  under  an  act  of  Parlia- 
ment, (hi) 

The  Court  has  not,  however,  any  power  to  grant  a  writ  to  supply  a 
casus  omissus  from  an  act  of  Parliament.  (?j) 

An  act  of  Parliament,  the  object  and  effect  of  which  is  merely  to  confirm 
private  statutes,  will  not  warrant  a  mandamus. (o) 

The  Court  will,  by  mandamus,  command  an  inferior  Court  to  exercise 
all  jurisdictions  conferred  upon  it  by  act  of  Parliament.  Thus  where  the 
Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  decided  not  to  rate  the  wages  of  millers  on  the 
erroneous  supposition  that  the  act  giving  it  jurisdiction  merely  autho- 
rised it  to  rate  the  wages  of  husbandmen,  the  writ  was  granted. (p)  So 
also  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  where  justices  misread  a  compensa- 
tion clause  in  a  local  act  as  to  the  extent  of  costs  to  be  allowed,  or  any 
other  essential  matter,  (g') 

And  the  Court  will  grant  the  writ,  &c.,  for  the  performance  of  such 


(i)  R.  Kent  (J.),  G  M.  &  S.  258     See  post,  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions,"  (Appeal.) 

(y)Ante,  p.  10.  R.  v.  Greene,  6  A.  &  B.  549.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  631.f  R.  t. 
Heywood,  1  M.  &  S.  524.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

(/f)  R.  V.  Eastern  Counties  Railway  10  A.  &  E.  546.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.  See 
tit.  "  Railways,"  post. 

(Z)  2  P.  &  D.  656.  Blakemore  v.  Glamorganshire  Canal,  1  M.  &  K.  154.  R.  r. 
Cumberworth,  3  B.  &  Ad.  108. f     Lee  v.  Milner,  2  M.  &  W.  824.* 

(m)  R.  V.  Ouze  Bank  Commissioners,  3  A.  &  E.  544.f  R.  v.  Gamble,  11  A.  &  E. 
556. f     See  post,  tit.  "  Drainage." 

(n)  Bagg's  case,  11  Co.  93  b.     R.  v.  Radnorshire  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  151,  M.  C. 

(o)  R.  V.  Chester,  (Ep.)  M.  9  Geo.  2 ;  1  W.  Blac.  24 ;  S.  C.  1  Wils.  206.  R.  v. 
Bugg,  M.  9  Geo.  2,  there  cited. 

(p)  R.  V.  Kent  (J.),  14  East,  395,  also  cited  in  R.  v.  Treasury  Lords,  2  P.  &  D. 
504.     See  tit.  "  Court,"  (Inferior,)  post. 

(q)  R.  V.  York  (J.),  1  A.  &  E.  828.f  S.  C.  3  N.  &M.  685,  cited  in  R.  v.  Treasury 
Lords  2  P.  &  D.  504.     See  tit.  "Compensation,"  post. 

April,  1852.— 6 


82 


TAPPINGS     MANDAMUS. 


power  or  duty,  altliougli  the  act  imposes  a  penalty  on  non-performance. 
Thus  as  upon  the  stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  18,  so  upon  the  act  of  Parliament 
that  mayors  of  corporations  should  attend  at  corporate  assemblies,  a  man- 
damus is  always  granted,  notwithstanding  the  penalty. (?•)  So  the  writ 
will  be  granted  to  command  justices  to  hear  an  information  properly  laid 
under  a  penal  statute,  (s) 

But  the  Court  will  not  command  the  doing  of  an  act  which  interferes 
*with  a  statutory  protection, (^)  nor  to  command  the  execution  of 
L  J  one  particular  part  only  of  a  power  given  by  an  act  of  Parlia- 
ment.(») 

.      Application. — Those   for  whose   benefit  a  statute   is   made, 

although  not  specifically  named,  should  be  the  parties,  applicants  for  the 
mandamus. (i')  Thus  the  Court  granted  a  mandamus  to  appoint  over- 
seers for  a  hamlet  upon  an  affidavit  that  there  were  poor  belonging  to  it, 
notwithstanding  that  the  stat.  13  &  14  Car.  2,  c.  12,  does  not  empower 
any  individual  to  enforce  the  appointment. (««) 

The  application  to  enforce  an  act  of  Parliament  is,  for  the  most  part, 
ex  debito  justiti?e.(:c)  But  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  grant  a  man- 
damus to  command  commissioners  appointed  under  a  local  act,  neither  on 
the  application  of  a  company  ordering  them  to  perform  a  contract  made 
witb  the  company,  nor  on  the  application  of  certain  rate  payers  ordering 
them  to  provide  for  the  execution  of  the  powers  under  the  act ;  where  no 
inconvenience  is  being  suffered  by  the  inhabitants.  (^) 

It  is,  however,  no  ground  for  refusing  the  writ,  that  the  period  of  time 
referred  to  in  the  powers  of  the  act  of  Parliament  under  which  the  defen- 
dant should  have  acted,  has  expired. (2) 

Administration,  Letters  of].     This  title  is  arranged  a.s  follows : — 


When  granted       -         -         -  -  32 

Durante  minori  setate      -  -  35 

Cum  testamento  annexo  -  35 

Returns         -         -        -        -  -  35 


Returns,  Lis  pendens     - 
Adnaiuistration  Bond 
Production,  &c. 
Distribution 


35 
3G 
36 
36 


],  when  granted. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  had  always  been  in  the 

constant  habit,  in  cases  of  complete  intestacy,  of  commanding  by  man- 
damus, the  due  granting  of  letters  of  administration. (a)     But  the  Court 

(r)  R.  V.  Everet,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  2G1. 

(s)  Ex  parte  Williams,  4  Jur.  171.  R.  v.  Jukes,  8  T.  R.  625.  See  tit.  "Quar- 
ter Sessions,"  (Justices.) 

(t)  R.  V.  Middlesex,  (J.)  9  A.  &  E.  540.t  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  402.  R.  v.  Northwich 
Saving's  Bank,  9  A  &  E.  729.t     S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  477. 

(u)  R.  V.  Birmingham  Canal,  2  W.  Blac.  708. 

\v)  R.  V.  Cumberland,  1  M.  &  S.  193. 

\w)  1  M.  k  S.  193.  R.  V.  Westmorland,  1  Wils.  138.  R.  v.  Kent,  (J.)  14,  East, 
395. 

(x)  Ante,  p.  30,  n.  (/),  and  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

(y)  R.  V.  Cheltenham,  (Commissioners)  4  Jur.  1060.     See  post,  tit.  "Contract." 

\z)  8  A.  &  E.  911  ;f  and  see  tit.  "Compensation,"  (Company,  Application.) 

\a)  3  Bl.  Com.  111.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)     Offlej  v.  ISest,  2  Keb.  243,  cit- 


ADMINISTRATION,  83 

will  not  thus  interfere  excejit  where  the  party  applying  is  entitled  to  the 
letters  by  act  of  Parliament,  or  where  there  has  been  unreasonable  delay 
in  the  *proceediugs,(i)  together  with  a  refusal  by  the  Spiritual  p  ^qo  -i 
Court  to  grant  them.(c)  But  when  cither  of  these  circumstances 
occurs,  the  Court  of  B.  B.  will  command  the  granting  of  the  letters  to 
those  entitled  to  have  them,  as  to  the  next  of  kin,(f/)  on  a  suggestion,  as 
before  stated,  of  intestacy,  (e) 

And  it  will  be  granted  as  well  to  command  the  ordinary(/)  as  the  pre- 
rogative or  other  Ecclesiastical  Court.  (^) 

But  as  the  ordinary,  &c.,  has  in  some  cases  the  proper  right  and  dis- 
cretion of  judging  of  the  fitness  of  the  person  to  whom  he  will  grant 
administration,  and  as  such  person  is  only  to  be  considered  a  trustee  of  the 
assets  without  having  any  profitable  interest,(/i)  the  mandatory  part  of  the 
writ  in  those  cases  merely  commands  a  grant  of  letters  of  administration 
according  to  the  statute.  Thus,  as  the  statute  enacts  that  it  must  be 
granted  to  the  widow  or  next  of  kin,  so  it  follows  that  it  may  be  granted 
to  either  in  the  discretion  of  the  ordinary,  &c.  But  if  the  widow  re- 
nounce, (t)  or  there  be  no  widow,  then  the  next  of  kin  are  entitled  ex  debito 
justitise,(y)  and  on  being  refused,  &c.,  may  have  a  mandamus.  (^)  It 
therefore  follows  that  the  Court  of  B.  K.  will  not  command  the  grant,  &c., 
to  a  particular  person,(/)  as  to  A.  and  B.  next  of  kin,  &c.,  as  the  eifect  of 

ing  Frenche's  case,  H.,  22  Car.  1.  Fenwicke  v.  Agar,  M.  1658,  where  a  mandamus 
for  such  purpose  was  granted  as  it  is  said  una  voce ;  also  citing  The  Countess  of 
Berkshire's  case.  Anon.,  Holt,  656 ;  5  Mod.  374;  1  Salk.  250,  251.  And  see  S.  C. 
2  Keb.  393.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  187.  Dunkin  v.  Brown,  3  Ktb.  350;  "Williams,  Exors. 
335.  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  501,  where  see  form  of  writ.  See  tit.  "Will." 
(6)  Anon.,  2  Barn.  348. 

(c)  Raine's  Case,  Ld.  Rajm.  262.  See  tit.  "Application,"  (Demand  and  Refusal). 

(d)  Anon.,  2  Sid.  114.  Dunkin's  case,  3  Keb.  348;  Jones,  225,  226.  Pierce  v. 
Perks,  1  Sid.  281.  Luskins  v.  Carver,  Sty.  8.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  ;  1  Sid.  372. 
S.  C.  2  Keb.  243,  393.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  187,  supra.  R.  v.  Dr.  Hay,  1  W.Blac.  640.  R.  v. 
Horsley,  8  East,  405.  Williams,  Exors.  335.  R.  v.  Patrich,  2  Keb.  172,  per  Keeling 
C.J. 

(e)  R.  V.  Raines,  12  Mod.  136.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  205.  S.  C.  Salk.  299.  S.  C.  Carth. 
457.  S;  C.  3  Salk.  162,  233.  S.  C.  Holt,  310.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  361.  S.  C.  3  P.  Wms. 
337,  n.  [h) ;  Fitz.  125  ;  3  Atk.  566  ;  2  Atk.  126.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.) 

(/)  Boon's  case,  cited  in  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  66.  And  see  S.  C.  2  Keb.  165,  per 
Moreton,  J.  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  13.  Pierce  v.  Perks,  1  Sid.  281.  Anon.,  2 
Sid.  114 ;  Jones,  225,  226.    Ryley's  Plac.  Pari.  553. 

[g)  R.  V.  Raines,  12  Mod.  136,  and  cases  there  cited.  Gray  v.  Tench,  Comb.  454. 
Lord  Suffolk's  case,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  8.  S.  C.  2  KeL  156,  pL  128.  See  tit.  "Courts, 
Inferior." 

(h)  R.  V.  Dr.  Bettesworth,  1  Bar.  425.  See  ante,  pp.  12, 13. 

(?)  Anon.,  Stra.  552,  cited  in  8  East,  408,  per  Lawrence,  J.  Lord  Suffolk's  case, 
Cas.  t.  Hard.  8.  S.  C.  2  Kel.  156,  pi.  128.  And  see  Lord  Londonderry's  case,  Stra. 
857.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  280;  Andr.  366.  Anon.,  Freem.  372.  R.  v.  Bettesworth,  1  Barn. 
424,  425.  R.  v.  Bettesworth,  2  Barn.  420.  R.  v.  Bettesworth,  Wm.  Kely,  139,  156. 
Wms.  Exors.  335,  336.  Gray  v.  Tench,  Comb.  454. 

(/)  R.  V.  Dr.  Hay,  1  W.  Blac.  640.  And  see  Lovegrovev.  Bethell,  1  W.Blac.  668  ; 
Stra.  552,  n.(l). 

[k)  R.  V.  Horsley  (Inhabs.),  8  East,  408,  per  Ellenborough,  C.J.  Anon.,  Stra.  552. 
Fawtry  v.  Fawtry,  Salk.  36.  Blackborough  v.  Davis,  Salk.  38.  S.  C.Ld.  Raym.  684. 
S.  C.  Com.  96.  S.  C.  1  P.  Wms.  41.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  615. 

[l]  Anon.,  7  Mod.  140.  Stewart  v.  Eddy,  7  Mod.  143  ;Ld. Raym.  262.  Anon.,  Stra. 
552.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man,"  (A). 


84  TArriNG's    imandamus. 

such  a  course  would  be  to  take  from  the  ordinary,  &c.,  the  power  aud  dis- 
cretion of  judging  which  degree  of  relation  is  next  of  kin,  or  of  the  prior- 
ity of  classes,  inter  se,  and  this  in  cases  where  the  su])jcct-matter  does  not 
r  *^J.  1  ^<^^*^"S  ^^  ^'^^  temporal  Courts.  (??i)  So  for  the  *.same  reason  the 
writ  must  not  command  the  letters,  &c.,  to  be  granted  to  the  wi- 
dow. (/()  For,  as  before  shown,  they  may  be  granted  either  to  the  widow 
or  to  the  next  of  kin.('>)  Neither  will  the  Court  command  it  to  be  grant- 
ed to  two  next  of  kin.(^>) 

But  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  "  to  J.  S.  or  next  of  kin,  accord- 
ing to  the  statute. "(^)  So  it  lies  to  command  a  grant  of  administration  to 
the  husband  of  his  deceased  wife's  estate  ;(r)  and  this  though  she  has 
made  a  will  of  property  devised  to  her  after  marriage,  with  express  power 
given  by  the  testator  for  her  so  to  do,  without  her  husband's  interference 
— but  otherwise  where  he  has  resigned  or  parted  with  all  interest  in  his 
wife's  fortune. (s)  So  it  lies  to  command  a  grant,  &c.  to  the  father  in 
preference  to  the  sister  of  the  intestate. (^) 

After  administration  has  been  granted  to  one,  the  Court  will  not  com- 
mand it  to  be  granted  to  another,  whether  of  the  same  or  of  a  nearer 
degree  of  kinship,  as  such  a  course  would  not  only  interfere  with  the  dis- 
cretion of  the  ordinary,(?<)  and  because  the  letters,  though  granted  to  an 
improper  person,  are  not  void,  but  merely  voidable,  but  also  because  there 
is  a  remedy  by  citation  by  which  a  repeal  of  the  letters  may  be  obtain- 
ed.(z;) 

So  where  the  applicant  has  a  right  to  letters,  &c.,  by  the  rules  only  of 
the  Ecclesiastical  Court,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  command  the  grant- 
ing of  them;(i<j)  and,  in  such  a  case  will  allow  the  Ecclesiastical  Court  to 
impose  reasonable  terms,  as  requiring  a  return  to  a  commission  of  appraise- 

{m)  Blackborough  V.  Davis,  1  P.  Wms.  45, 4C,  per  Sir  B.  Shower. 

[n)  Anon.,  11  Mod.  137.  Blackborough  v.  Davies,  Salk.  38.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  G84. 
S.  C.  Com.  Rep.  96.  S.  C.  1  P.  Wms.  41.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  615.  Smith's  case,  Stra.  892. 
Barker's  case,  Andr.  24.  Stewart  v.  Eddy,  1  Mod.  143.  Anon.,  Stra.  552.  Pierce  v. 
Perks,  1  Sid.  281.  Offley  v.  Best,  1  Sid.  372.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  243,  393.  S.  C.  1  Lev. 
187.  And  see  Luskins  v.  Carver,  Sty.  7,  8.  Fortre  v.  Fortre,  1  Show.  351.  S.  C. 
Salk.  36.  S.  C.  Holt,  42. 

(o)  Sand's  case.  Fortre  v.  Fortre,  1  Show.  351;  and  in  Anihurst's  case.  1 
Vent.  188. 

(p)  1  P.  Wms.  45.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  251,  supra. 

(q)  Anon.,  7  Mod.  140.  Steward  v.  Eddy,  7  Mod.  143. 

(r)  Fortre  v.  Fortre,  1  Show.  351.  S.  C.  Salk.  36.  S.  C.  Holt,  42.  R.  v.  Bettes- 
worth,  Stra.  891,  1118;  Wms.  Exors.  335. 

(s)  R.  V.  Bettcsworth,  7  Mod.  313.  S.  C.  Stra.  891.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  424.  S.  C.  Stra. 
956,  nil,  1118.  Brook  v.  Turner,  1  Mod.  211.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (D.  4). 

(t)  Coplestone  v.  Coplestone,  2  Show.  307.  3  Co.  40;  Prec.  Ch.527.  Blackborough 
V.  Davis,  1  Salk.  38;  2  Vern.  125. 

[u]  Blackborough  v.  Davis,  1  Com.  Rep.  96.  S.  C.  2  Com.  108.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  38. 
S.  C.  1  Salk.  251.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  615.  S.  C.  Holt,  43.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  648.  S.  C.  1 
P.  Wms.  41,  45.  3  Bac.  Abr.  381.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.)  But  see  Gray  v. 
Tench,  Comb.  454,  contra. 

{v)  Blackborough  v.  Davis,  1  Com.  96.  S.  C.  2  Com.  108.  S.  C.  1  P.  Wms.  42. 
Allen  V.  Dundas,  3  T.  R.  128.  But  see  Anon.,  1  Frcem.  372;  Wms.  Exors.  335, 
n.  (a). 

(iv)  Anon.,  2  Bam.  334,  348,  361. 


ADMINISTRATION.  85 

mcnt,  &c.,  the  Judge,  &c.,  having  power  to  object  to  the  security  which 
auy  person  shall  oifer  who  prays  administration. (x) 

So  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  command  the  Spiritual  Court  to  put 
their  seal  to  letters  of  administration,  which  have  been  decreed  to  the  pro- 
secutor, *the  Court  saying  it  could  not  oblige  the  Spiritual  Court  r-^c  oc  -i 
to  execute  its  sentences. (_y)  ^ 

-,]   durante  miiiori  setate. — As  the  writ  of  mandamus  is  granted  to 


oblige  the  doing  of  justice  to  the  party  who  sues  out  the  writ,  it  does  not 
lie  to  command  a  grant  of  letters,  &c.,  durante  minori  ajtate,  it  being 
discretionary  with  the  ordinary  to  whom  he  shall  grant  it  :(z)  nor  will  it, 
for  the  same  reason,  go  to  grant  administration,  with  the  will  annexed, 
during  minority,  neither  to  a  certain  person,  nor  generally. (a) 

,]  cttJJt  tcstamento  annexe. — But  the  Court  of  B.  Jx.  has,  by  man- 
damus, commanded  a  grant  of  letters,  &c.,  cum  testamento  annexo,  to  the 
next  of  kin  ;(i)  yet  the  Court  will  not  command  a  grant,  &c.,  to  the  resi- 
duary legatee,  because  not  within  the  statute. 

.     Return,  Us  pendens. — A  return  of  lis  pendens,  is  no  answer  to 

the  wi-it,  if  the  consanguinity  be  not  denied  ;(c)  but  if  it  be  denied,  the 
return  will  be  good.(f/)  So  a  return  is  good,  which  alleges,  that  the  de- 
fendant had  admitted  in  a  suit,  that  by  deed  before  marriage,  he  had 
agreed  that  his  wife  might  make  a  will,  which  she  did,  and  that  suit  was 
depending  for  administration,  with  such  will  annexed,  for  the  defendant's 
(husband's)  consent  appears. (e)  So  a  return  that^administration  is  already 
committed,  and  that  there  is  no  lis  pendens,  is  good;(/)  or  that  there  is 
a  will  in  litigation,(r/)  and  if  such  a  fact  appear  by  affidavit,  the  Court 

(x)  Anon.,  2  Barn.  334,  348,  citing  Lord  Londonderry's  case,  Stra.  S.  C.  1  Barn 
280.  Anon.,  2  Barn.  361.  See  ante,  pp.  12,  13;  and  see  tit.  "Discretion." 

{y)  Tremain's  case,  Comb.  158.     See  tit.  "  Seal,"  (Affixing). 

(z)  See  Ante,  pp.  12,  13.  Smith's  case,  Stra.  802.  S.  C.  Anon.,  1  Barn.  3*70, 
425.  S.  C.  Andr.  24.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.)  Barlier's  case,  Andr.  24,  366; 
Fitzg.  163.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)    But  see  contra,  1  Barn.  370,  per  C.  J. 

{a)  R.  V.  Bettesworth,  Stra.  956.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  234.  S.  C.  2  Kel.  139.  Barl^er's 
case,  M.  11  Geo.  2  Andr.  24.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.)  "VVms.,  Exo'rs.  374.  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) 

[b)  Lnskins  v.  Carver,  Sty.  7,8,  citing  Countess  of  Barkshire's  case,  H.,  20  Jac. ; 
St.  Burieu's  case.  Dunkin  v.  Mun,  Raym.  235.  But  see  contra,  R.  v.  Bettes^yortll. 
W.  Kel.  139,  156  ;  and  Anon.,  2  Barn.  361,  per  Page,  J.  S.  C.  Stra.  956;  Wms. 
Exors.  362.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) 

(e)  R.  V.  Dr.  Hay,  1  W.  Blac.  640.  S.  C.  Burr.  2295.  Anon.  Stra.  552.  R.  v. 
Bettesworth,  Stra.  891,  956,  1111,  1118.  Stewart  v.  Eddy,  7  Mod.  143.  Anon., 
Andr.  24.  Smith's  case,  Stra.  892.  See  generally  as  to  Lis  pendens,  ante,  p.  23, 
and  post,  tits.  "  Churchwarden,"  (Return  Lis  pendens),  "  Will,"  (Return  Lis 
pendens.) 

[d)  Lovegrove  v.  Bethell,  1  W.  Blac.  668.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  And  see 
R.  V.  Dr.  Harris,  1  W.  Blac.  430.  Anon.,  Holt,  656;  5  Mod.  374;  1  Salk.  250, 
251. 

(e)  R.  V.  Bettesworth,  T.,  12  Geo.  2,  Stra.  1111.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (D.  3.) 
(/)  Blackborough  v.  Davis,  1  V.  Wms.  43,  per  Holt,  C.  J.     Sand's  case,  1  Sid. 

179. 

(^r)  R.  V.  Raines,  12  Mod.  136.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  205.  S.  C.  Salk.  299.  S.  C.  Carth 
457.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  162.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  233.  S.  C.  Holt.  310.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  361.' 
S.  C.  3  P.  Wms.  337,  n.  [b.)  Fitzg.  125.  Steward  v.  Eddy,  7  Mod.  143.  Gray  v. 
Tench,  Comb.  454.   Anon.,  7  Mod.  140 ;  Ld.  Raym.  262.   Blockborough  v.  Davis,  1 


86  tapping's     MANDAMUS. 

will  *supersode  the  writ;  or  if  it  appear  on  the  affi'lavits  in  support 
L       -I     of  the  application  for  the  writ,  will  deny  it.(7i) 

].     Administration  Bond ;  Production,  &c. — Where  the  produc- 


tion of  the  original  administration  bond,  given  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  on  the  grant  of  administration,  is  material,  in  a  suit  brought 
by  the  creditors  of  the  intestate,  in  the  name  of  the  archbishop ;  and  the 
record  keeper  of  the  Prerogative  Court  refuses  to  allow  the  bond  to  be 
taken  out  of  his  office,  as  being  contrary  to  the  practice  of  the  Prerogative 
Court,  the  proper  course  is  to  proceed  by  a  mandamus  to  the  Ecclesiasti- 
cal Court,  upon  the  discussion  of  which,  the  validity  of  the  objection  to 
produce  the  bond,  maybe  gone  into;(<')  such  a  mandamus  issues  ex  debito 
justitiae-O') 

].     Distrihution. — The  writ  of  mandamus  is  also  grantable   to 

command  a  distribution  to  those  entitled(/.-)  of  an  intestate's  personal 
estate,  according  to  the  stat.  22  &  23  Car.  2,  c.  10,(^)  and,  as  by  such 
statute,  there  can  be  no  representation  after  brother's  and  sister's  children, 
so  a  mandamus  for  letters,  &c.,  to  the  issues  of  such  children,  will  be 
refused.  (?) 

Admiralty,  Court  of].     See  tit.  Courts  Inferior. 

Admiralty,  Lords  of].  See  tits.  Contract:  HaJfpay;  Pension; 
Treasury  (^Lords  of). 

Advocate  of  Doctors'  Commons.]  It  has  been  settled  that  a  man- 
damus does  not  lie  to  command  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  to  issue 
his  fiat  to  the  Vicar  General  of  his  province,  to  make  out  a  receipt  under 
his  seal,  commanding  the  Dean  of  the  Arches  to  admit  a  Doctor  of  Civil 
Law,  graduated  at  Cambridge,  to  be  an  advocate  of  the  Court  of  Arches, 
for  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  no  authority  to  administer  a  legal  remedy, 
except  to  enforce  a  legal  right,(m)  and  it  would  seem,  in  analogy  with  the 

P.  Wms.  47.  Pierce  v.  Perks,  1  Sid.  281.  Offley  v.  Best,  372.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  187. 
R.  T.  Dr.  Hay,  1  W.  Blac.  640.  Loveprove  v.  Bethel,  1  W.  Blac.  GG8.  Wms.  Exors. 
336.  But  see  contra,  Walker  v.  Woolaston,  2  P.  Wms.  576,  589.  S.  C.  Stra. 
917.  S.  C.  Fitz.  202.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  423,  467.  WiUis  v.  Rich,  2  Atk.  285.  Impey 
V.  Pitt,  2  Show.  69,  not.     See  ante,  p.  23. 

(/()  Anon.,  5  Mod.  374.  Frederick  v.  Hook,  Carth.  153.  R.  v.  Hav,  Burr.  2295. 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.) 

{ i)  Canterbury  (Archbp.)  v.  Tubb,  3  Bing.  N.  G.  787.t     S.  C.  4  Scott,  543. 

(/)  Canterbury,  (Archbp.)  v.  House,  Cowp.  140.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) 

(k)  Rett's  case,'  1  P.  Wms.  25.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  250-1.  Blackborough  v.  Davis,  I 
Salk.  251.     S.  C.  Holt,  43. 

{/)  See  supra,  tit.  "  Act  of  Parliament."  Rett  v.  Rett,  1  Com.  87.  S.  C.  Ld. 
Raym.  571.  S.  C.  12  Holt,  259.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  250.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  138.  S.  C.  2  Eq. 
Abr.  435,  pi.  16.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  409.  S.  C.  1  P.  Wms.  25.  Bowers  v.  Littlewood,  1 
P.  Wms.  594.  Gibs.  Cod.  481;  4  Burn's  Eccl.  Law,  370;  2  Vern.  233;  Prec. 
Chan.  28.  Caldicot  v.  Smith,  2  Show.  286  ;  Lovelass,  77.  Carter  v.  Crawley. 
Raym.  496. 

{m)  R.  V.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  8  East,  213.  See  also  R.  v.  Lincoln's  Inn,  7 
D.  &  R.  364,  per  Abbott,  C.  J.;  and  7  D.  &  R.  364,  n.  (a).  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man." 
(C.)     See  tit.  "Inn  of  Court." 


31 

Alderman. 

37 

Enforcing  duty 

- 

-     38 

37 

Removal 

- 

-    38 

37 

Restoration     - 

. 

-     38 

38 

Returns 

. 

-     39 

38 

General   - 

_ 

-    39 

38 

Non-residence  - 

_ 

-     40 

38 

Erasure  of  Corporation 

38 

Books,  &c.    - 

_ 

-     40 

38 

As  to  summons 

- 

-     40 

ALDERMAN.  87 

rule  as  to  Inns  of  Court,  that  no  one  has  an  inchoate  right  to  be  admitted 
a  member  of  the  College  of  Doctors  of  Law;  and,  therefore,  that  a  man- 
damus will  not  in  any  case  lie  to  command  such  an  admittance. 

♦Affiliation.]      Sec  tit.  Bastardy. 

^  [*37] 


Alderman.]  Although  the  office  of  alderman  be  not  a  place  of  profit, 
but  of  freedom  and  government  merely,(n)  yet  the  remedy  by  mandamus 
has  been,  by  several  statutes,  made  applicable  to  the  office  of  alderman. (o) 

This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows : — 

Alderman     -         -         -         - 
Election  -         .         . 

Application 

Rule 
Service 
Return  and  admit  - 
Admit  -         -         -         - 
Swear  -         -         -         - 
Present  and  swear 
Admit  and  swear   - 

.]     Election. — It  seems  to  be  now  settled,  that  a  mandamus  will 

not  be  granted  to  command  a  corporation  to  fill  up  the  office  of  alderman 
where  the  number  is  indefinite. (p)  But  where  the  number  of  the  alder- 
men is  definite,  and  there  is  a  vacancy,  then  it  lies  to  command  the  pro- 
ceeding to  an  election  of,  and  to  elect  an  alderman. (g^)  But  the  Court 
will  not,  nor  has  it  the  power,  on  the  motion  of  the  defendant,  to  give  any 
directions  respecting,  or  to  prescribe  the  time  of  election,  for  that  must 
be  governed  by  the  constitution  of  the  city.(r)  The  Court  will,  however, 
in  order  to  ensure  such  election,  grant  the  writ  to  command  the  alder- 
men, &c.,  to  attend  a  corporate  meeting  for  the  purpose  of  such  election. (.s) 

The  Court  of  B.  R.  has,  by  such  writ,  commanded  the  Court  of  Alder- 
men of  London,  to  return  certain  persons  to  the  Court  of  Aldermen,  as 
the  persons  chosen  by  the  wardmote,  &c.,  and  also,  if  upon  a  false  return, 
of  persons  not  chosen  by  the  wardmote,  they  refuse  to  do  justice  to  the 
parties  injured,  after  complaint  made.(<) 

Application,  Rule. — The  application  for  the  rule  may  be  made 

(n)  Exeter  (City),  v.  Glide,  4  Mod.  33. 

(o)  See  Stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4 ;  5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  76  ;  and  I  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  2G,  App. 
See  tits.  "  Office,"  "  Act  of  Parliament." 

{p)  R.  V.  Fowey  (Mayor),  2  B.  &  C.  588,  590,f  per  Abbott,  C.  J.  But  see  p.  596, 
Best,  J.,  contra.  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  139.f     And  see  R.  v.  Pateman,  2  T.  R.  777. 

{q)  See  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App.  R.  v.  Evesham  (Mayor),  7  Mod.  I6G.  S.  C. 
Stra.  949.  S.  C.  2  Barn.  236,  2G5.  R.  v.  Bridgewater  (Mayor),  2  Chit.  256.t  R.  v. 
Fowey  (Mayor),  4  D.  &  R.  139.f  S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  588.f  R.  v.  Attwood,  4  B.  &  Ad. 
482.t     R.  V.  Salway,  9  B.  &  C.  432.f     See  tit.  "  Office,"  (Election). 

(r)  7  Mod.  166.  S.  C.  Stra.  949.  S.  C.  2  Barn.  236,  265,  supra.  But  see  stats. 
App. 

{s\  R.  T.  Kirke,  &c.,  5  B.  &  Ad.  1089.f 

{t)  R.  V.  Heathcote,  10  Mod.  59.     S.  C.  Fort.  253,  283 ;  Salk.  670. 


88  tapping's    mandamus. 

immediately  upon  the  default  of  the  Municipal  Corporation,  &c.,  in 
j-^qo-i  *going  to  the  election  ;(m)  but  the  Court  will  not,  as  before  stated, 
*-  name  a  day  for  the  election  in  the  rule,  but  will  leave  that  to  the 

proper  officer,  and  if  ho  do  wrong,  the  parties  may  then  go  to  the  Court 
to  oblige  him  to  act  rightly. (r) 

Service. — The  rule  should  be  served  on  all  parties,  who  are  bound 

to  attend  and  assist  at  such  election. (?<;) 

.]  Return  and  Admit. — The  writ  has  also  been  granted  to  com- 
mand a  return  to  the  Court  of  Aldermen,  of  one  chosen  alderman,  and 
also  to  the  Court  of  Aldermen  to  admit  him.(.c) 

.]      Admission. — It  lies   also  to   command  admission   to   such 

office. (3/) 

.]  Swear. — It  lies  also  to  command  the  swearing  in  of  an  alder- 
man. (.:) 

.]  Present  and  sicear. — So  the  writ  has  been  granted  to  com- 
mand the  bailiff  and  jurats  of  a  borough  to  present  and  admit  to  the  office 
of  alderman. (a) 

.]      Admit  and  Swear. — So  it  has  been  granted  to  admit  and 

swear  into  such  office. (?*) 

.]      Enforcing  Duti/. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to  enforce  the 

duty  of  the  office  of  alderman. (0) 

.]      Removed. — It  lies  in  some  cases  to  command  a  municipal 

corporation  to  assemble  and  consider  the  propriety  of  removing  from 
their  offices  certain  aldermen.  For  the  cause  of  the  writ  in  such  case  is 
connected  with  the  administration  of  justice. (r/) 

.]      Restoration. — It  lies  to  restore  to  the  office  of  alderman  one 

improperly  removed  therefrom. (e)     But  it  does  not  lie  to  restore  A., 

(m)  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor,  &c.),  4  Q.  B.  801.f  See  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89, 
App.,  as  to  notice  and  practice. 

[v)  R.  V.  Bridgewater  (Mayor),  2  Chit.  256.f  R.  v.  Evesham  (Mayor),  T  Mod. 
1C6.     S.  C.  Stra.  949.     S.  C.  Barn.  236,  265.     See  tit.  "Burgess." 

{w)  R.  V.  Fowey  (Mayor,  (fee),  4  D.  &  R.  139.t  per  Abbott,  C.  J. 

{x)  R.  V.  Montacute,  1  W.  Blac.  61.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283,  citing  R.  t.  London  (May- 
or), Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (C.) 

[y)  R.  V.  Norwich  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  436.  S.  C.  Holt.  444,  where  sec  returns  to 
such  a  writ. 

(z)  Anon.  2  Show.  183. 

(a)  R.  V.  Ld.  Montacute,  1  W.  Blac.  61.  S.  C.  1  "U'ils.  283,  citing  R.  v.  Clithero 
(Mayor.) 

(6)  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  9  B.  &  C.  l.f  S.  C.  4  M.  k  R.  46.  R.  v.  London  (May- 
or), 3  B.  &  Ad.  255,  266';t  S.  C.  2  N.  &  M.  126.f  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  465,  where  see  a 
form  of  writ.     See  tit.  "Town  Clerk." 

(c)  R.  V.  Portsmouth  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  C.  155.f  See  tits.  "Mayor,"  "Corpora- 
tion" (Municipal),  "Office." 

((f)  R.  V.  Portsmouth  (Mayor,  &c.),  3  B.  &  C.  153.f  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  767-1  R.  v. 
Truro,  H.  T.  1821.  R.  v.  Monday,  Cowp.  530.  R.  v.  Heaven,  2  T.  R.  772;  Bull. 
N.  P.  199.  See  also  5  D.  &  R.  414f  ;  5  D.  &  R.  481.t  R.  v.  Totness  (Mavor),  5  D. 
&  R.  481.t  See  R.  v.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  5  D.  &  R.  414.t  See  tits.  "  Capital  Bur- 
gess" (Removal),  "  Councilman  "  (Removal),  "  Office  "  (Removal). 

(e)  Shuttleworth  v.  Lincoln  (Corporation),  2  Bulst.  122,  also  cited  in  Stamp's 
case,  Ravm.  12.  R.  v.  Gloucester  (Mayor),  3  Bulst.  189.  S.  C.  1  Roll.  409.  Had- 
dock's case,  Raym.  435.    R.  v.  The  Baily,  &c.,  1  Keb.  33.    Wigan  (Town),  v.  Pilk- 


ALDERMAN. 


89 


elected  alderman,  &c.,  in  the  place  of  B.,  afterwards  restored  by  manda- 
mus, though  the  place  of  B.  be  afterwards  vacant,  for  A.  must  be  p^oq-i 
elected  de  novo.(/) 

So  it  lies  to  restore  an  alderman  to  his  precedency  in  a  corporation. (^) 
But  it  lies  not  to  restore  a  poor  alderman, (/«)  poverty  having  been  held  to 
be  a  good  ground  for  deprivation  from  magistracy. 

.     Returns. — Formerly,  it  was  a  good  return  to  a  mandamus  to 

restore  to  the  office  of  alderman,  that  the  prosecutor  had  not  taken  the 
statutory  oaths. (0  So,  formerly,  it  was  a  sufficient  return,  that  the  pro- 
secutor was  turned  out  by  the  commissioners  acting  by  virtue  of  the  Act 
of  Corporations.  (_/) 

But  inasmuch  as  an  alderman  may  be  properly  amoved  from  his  office 
for  any  matter  contrary  to  the  duty  of  such  office,  so  such  matter  will  be 
good  as  a  return. (/;;)  As  an  alderman  cannot  be  removed  at  pleasure,  so 
the  return  of  a  custom  to  do  so  will  be  bad.(0  But  it  has  been  held  not 
to  be  a  good  return,  that  the  prosecutor  lends  money  to  young  men  by 
the  hands  of  his  wife,  for  such  is  merely  a  collateral  cause,  and  not  trench- 
ing to  things  incident  to  the  place  of  alderman. (wi)  Nor  can  he  be  re- 
moved for  publicly  or  ^privately  speaking  scandalous  words  of  the  r:M  n-i 
mayor, (K)if  not  spoken  of  him  as  mayor, 

iugton,  1  Keb.  597.  Cripps  v.  Mainstone  (Mayor),  1  Keb.  812,  citing  Warren's 
case,  Cro.  Jac.  540,  and  Estwick's  case,  Sty.  43.    R.  v.  Rippon  (Town),  2  Keb.  15. 

V.  Wiggon  (Mayor),  1  Sid.  92.     R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  12G8,  per  Ld.   Mansfield. 

R.  V.  Shrewsbury  (Mayor),  2  Barn.  394.  S.  C.  Stra.  1051.  S.  C.  W.  Keb.  282.  S. 
C.  7  Mod.  201.  S.  C.  Andr.  85,  104,  l7l,  320.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  Pahn.  451.  S. 
C.  Noy.  92.  S.  C.  Latch.  229  ;  2  Dyer,  332  b.,  333,  pi.  28.  Lumley's  case,  E.,  3  Car. 
B.  R.,  there  cited.  Coventry's  case.  Latch.  123.  S.  C.  Poph.  ITG.  Taylor's  case, 
Poph.  133.  R.  v.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  Say.  37.  Anon.  Sty.  151.  R.v.  Rippon  (Mayor), 
2  Salk.  433.  R.  v.  Andover  (Mayor),  3  Salk.  229.  R.  v.  Taylor,  3  Salk.  231— 
8.  R.  V.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233,  11,  s.  16.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  R.  v.  London 
(City),  Skin.  293,  301.  S.  C.  4  Doug.  360.  Smith's  case,  Carth.  217.  S.  C.  4  Mod. 
52,  53.  S.  C.  1  Show.  263,  274,  280.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  17.  S.  C.  Holt,  168,  310 ;  Trem. 
511.  R.  V.  Stafford  (Mayor),  2  Keb.  264;  March,  288,  pi.  237.  R.  v.  Brayfield,  2 
Keb.  488.  R.  v.  Jay,  3  Keb.  714.  R.  v.  Leicester  (Mayor),  Burr.  2087,  2089  ; 
Braithwaites,  1  Vent.  19.  R.  v.  Sanchar,  2  Show.  66,  67.  S.  C.  2  Jones,  121  ;  Trem. 
PI.  Cor.  511,  512,  517,  523,  544,  where  see  forms  of  writ.  Exeter  (City),  v.  Glide, 
4  Mod.  33.  S.  C.  1  Show.  258,  364.  S.  C.  1  Comb.  197.  S.  C.  Holt,  169,  435.  S.  C. 
12  Mod.  28,  251.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  223.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  99.  Enfield  v.  Hills, 
Sir  T.  Jon.  116.     R.  v.  Thacker,  Sir  T.  Jon.  121. 

(/)  Shuttleworth  v.  Lincoln  (Corp.),  2  Bulst.  122.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.) 

[g)  See  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  1269,  1270.  R.  v.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  542.  R.  v. 
Canterbury  (City),  1  Lev.  119,  also  cited  in  Dr.  Walker's  case,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  214. 
See  tit.  "  Precedence." 

(/()  R.  V.  Andover  (Mayor),  3  Salk.  229,  3.     But  see  R.  v.  Liverpool,  Burr.  723. 

[i]  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  12  Mod.  17.  R.  v.  Exeter,  Comb.  197.  For  the  form 
of  a  return  to  a  writ  to  restore,  &c.,  see  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  4  Doug.  360. f  R. 
V.  Thacker,  Sir  T.  Jones,  121.     See  tit.  "Office,"  (Return  Oaths). 

(y)  R.  V.  Cooper,  1  Keb.  777,  and  Prin's  case,  there  cited. 

[k]  R.  V.  Philingham,  1  Keb.  777.  R.  v.  Exeter  (Mayor),  Comb.  197.  Bagg's 
case,  1  Roll.  173,  224.    S.  C.  11  Rep. 93,  b.    See  tit.  "Office,"  (Restoration  Return). 

[I)  Warren's  case,  Cro.  Jac.  540  ;  2  Dyer,  332,  6,  n.  2;  Roll.  112,  cited  in  R.  v. 
Oxford  (Mayor),  Latch.  231.  See  also  Cripps  v.  Maidstone  (Mayor),  1  Keb.  812. 
See  tit.  "Town  Clerk"  (Restoration  Return). 

(m)  R.  V.  Gloucester  (Mayor),  3  Bulstr.  189.     Bragg's  case,  11  Rep.  93. 

[n)  R.  V.  Oxford  (Mayor),  Latch.  229  ;  Cro.  Jac.  540,  supra.  R.  v.  Exeter 
(Mayor),  Comb.  197.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration  Return). 


90  tapping's     MANDAMUS. 

But  it  is  a  good  return,  that  the  prosecutor  is  a  common  drunkard,  for 
if  he  be  ebriosus  common,  and  not  by  accident,  he  is  an  unfit  person  for 
government;  and  this,  therefore,  is  a  good  cause  to  remove  him.(o) 

.     Non -residence. — If  an  alderman  absent  himself  from  the  place 

for  which  he  is  appointed,  it  is  good  cause  for  removal,  because  residence 
is  incident  to  his  ofiice.  And  in  a  return  of  such  a  cause,  the  words 
deseruit  and  rcliquit  have  been  held  to  mean  an  absolute  leaving. (^) 
The  nature  of  the  office  of  alderman  requires  that  the  person  holding 
must  be  both  a  citizen  and  an  inhabitant  of  the  place  where  chosen ;  his 
very  name  imports  it ;  therefore,  as  non-residence  makes  him  incapable 
of  doing  his  duty,  so  a  return  that  "recessit  elongavit  et  habitationem 
suam  rcli(juit  et  deseruit,  et  amovebat  seipsum  et  familiam  suam  ad  A. 
extra  civitutcm,  &c.,  et  officium  suum  voluntarie  rcliquit  et  neglexit," 
(setting  forth  wherein),  and  that  he  had  notice  of  several  Courts  held, 
but  did  not  attend  them,  has  been  held  to  be  good.(r^)  So  where  the 
return  states  that  the  prosecutor  has  totally  left,  &c.,  it  is  good,  but  con- 
tra if  it  merely  state  the  absence  to  be  for  a  limited  and  reasonable 
timc.(r) 

.     Erasure,  &C.  of  Corporation  Boohs. — So  it  is  a  good  return 

that  the  prosecutor,  contrary  to  his  duty  and  oath  of  office,  spoliavit  et 
dilaceravit  quaedam  recorda,  &c.  of  a  Court,  and  which  offence  was  after- 
wards presented;  notwithstanding  the  presentment  be  not  shewn. (.s) 

.     As  to  Summons. — But  before  the  judgment  of  amotion  can  be 

legally  pronounced,  the  party  must  have  been  summoned  for  his  apparent 
misconduct,  and  such  summoning  must  be  shewn  upon  the  face  of  the 
return,  as  an  excuse  or  justification  might  have  been  proved. ()")  If, 
however,  it  appear  that  the  prosecutor  was  not  an  inhabitant  within  the 
city  at  the  time  of  the  amotion,  &c.,  there  is  no  need  of  an  averment  of 
summons,  for  the  difference  is,  where  there  is  an  opportunity  of  summon- 
ing him  and  where  not.(«) 

Alehouse.]     License. — It  does  not  lie  to  command  justices  to  license  a 

(-:;:  1 1  -1    *victualler  to  sell  ale,  notwithstanding  it  was  suggested  their  refusal 

proceeded  from  a  mistaken  view  of  their  jurisdiction,(<;)  and  also, 

(o)  R.  T.  Gloucestor  (Mayor),  3  Bulstr.  189.  S.  C.  1  Roll.  409  ;  2  Roll.  Abr.  455. 
See  tit.  "Office"  (Restoration  Return). 

{p)  Exeter  (City),  v.  Glide,  Holt,  169,  435.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  33;  3  Bulst.  189  ;  1 
Co.  409.     See  tit.  "Office"  (Restoration  Return). 

[q)  4  Mod.  33,  supra. 

(r)  R.  V.  Leicester  (Mayor),  Burr.  2087.  R.  v.  Exeter,  Comb.  197.  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "  Man."  (D.  4). 

(«)  Wigan  (Town),  v.  Pilkington,  1  Keb.  597.  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration 
Return). 

(t)  Comb.  197,  per  Holt,  C.  J.,  citing  Mod.  135,  833.  R.  v.  Shrewsbury  (Mayor), 
7  Mod.  201.  S.  C.  2  Barn.  394.  R.  v.  Heaven,  2  T.  R.  772.  R.  v.  Chalk,  Ld. 
Raym.  225.  S.  C.  Salk.  428.  S.  C.  5  Mod.  254,  257.  R.  v.  Brayfield.  2  Keb.  488. 
R.  V.  Lyme  Regis,  Doug.  149,  160  ;  12  Mod.  29.  Exeter  (City),  v.  Glide,  4  Mod.  33, 
and  post,  "  Application,"  and  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration  Summons). 

(m)  12  Mod.  29,  supra.     See  post,  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration  Return). 

(y)  R.  V.  Farringdon  (J.),  4  D.  &  R.  735. f     Anon.  1  Barn.  402. 


ALE-TASTER,     ETC.  91 

notwitlistandiiig  a  very  strong  case  of  partiality,  &c.  was  made  out ;  for  it 
is  a  matter  entirely  within  their  discretion. (ic)  The  proper  course  in 
such  a  case,  is  to  move  for  a  criminal  information. (x) 

Nor  does  it  lie  to  command  justice  to  rehear  an  application  for  an  ale- 
house license  which  they  have  refused,  though  it  be  suggested  that  their 
refusal  proceeded  from  a  mistaken  notion  as  to  their  jurisdiction  ;(_y)  nor 
to  rehear  an  ajoplication  at  any  other  period  of  the  year  than  within  the 
first  twenty  days  of  September,  though  the  justices  may  have  refused  the 
license  under  a  misapprehension  of  the  law.(z) 

It  lies,  however,  to  command  justices  to  receive  the  information  and 
complaint  of  one  who  prosecutes  as  well  for  himself  as  for  the  poor,  &c., 
against  another  for  selling  ale  and  beer  by  retail  without  being  duly 
licensed,  and  to  pi'oceed  to  hear  and  adjudge  thereon. (a)  So  it  lies  to 
command  justices  to  enter  continuances  upon  an  appeal  against  a  convic- 
tion by  two  justices,  under  the  Alehouse  Act,  9  Geo.  4,  c.  Gl.{h) 

Ale-taster.]  Swearing  in. — It  lies  to  swear  in  an  ale-taster,  as  the 
ale-taster  of  Honiton ;  the  having  such  office  appearing  to  be  a  condition 
precedent  to  his  being  chosen  portreve,  who  is  the  returning  officer  for 
Members  of  Parliament.(c) 

Alimony.]  A  writ  of  mandamus  has  been  granted,  commanding  a 
husband  to  grant  his  wife  alimony,  but  it  is  presumed,  that  at  this  day  a 
writ  for  such  purpose  would  not  be  awarded. ((7) 

Allegiance  Oath.]     See  tit.  Manor  [Leet  Resiant). 

Alms.]     See  tit.  Charitt/. 

Amicable  Assurance  Company.]  Director,  Sicearing  in. — It  lies 
to  command  the  swearing  in  of  a  director  of  a  chartered  company,  as  the 
Amicable  Assurance  Company. (<?) 

♦Answer  in  Chancery.]     See  tit.  College  {Seal).  r*491 

Apparitor  General.]     It  lies  for  the  office  of  apparitor  general  of 

(w)  Anon.  1  Barn.  402.  Giles's  case,  Stra.  881.  S.  C,  and  cited  in  R.  v.  Can- 
terbury (Archbp.),  15  East,  127.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.),  Audr.  180.  See  ante, 
pp.  12,  13,  14. 

[x]  R.  V.  Nottingham  (J.),  Say.  217.  R.  v.  Young,  &c.,  Burr.  561.  And  see 
Burr.  1317;  Burr.  1318  ;  1  T.  R.  692  ;  and  Salk.  45,  tit.  "Alehouses." 

(y)  R.  V.  FaiTingdon  Ward  (J.),  4  D.  &  R.  735.f 

(z)  R.  V.  Surrey  (J.),  5  D.  &  R.  308  ;f  and  see  4  D.  &  R.  735.f  But  see  tit. 
"  Quarter  Sessions." 

(a)  R.  V.  Drake,  6  M.  &  S.  116.     See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions." 

(b)  R.  V.  Cheshire  (J.),  3  P.  &  D.  33,  n.  (a). 

(c)  Ravenhil's  case,  Stra.  608.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)    See  tit.  "Portreve." 

(d)  R.  V.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  167,  per  Windham,  J.     See  ante,  p.  29. 

(e)  Anon.  Str.  696.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)     See  tit.  "  Company." 


92  T  A  P  P  I  N  G  '  S     M  A  N  D  A  M  U  S. 

the  Arehbisliop  of  Cantcrbury,(/)  lie  being  the  messenger  who  serves  the 
process  of  the  Spritual  Court.  His  duty  is  to  cite  offcmlers  to  appear,  to 
arrest  them,  and  to  execute  the  sentence  or  decree  of  the  Judges,  &c.(,f/) 

But  it  will  not  lie  to  command  him  to  execute  his  duty,(A)  for  he  is  a 
servant  of  his  Court,  and  punishable  there. 

Appeal.]     See  tit.  Quarter  Sessions  (Appeal). 

Apprentice.]  As  to  admitting  apprentices  to  freedom,  Sec,  see  titles 
Franchise ;  Freedom. 

The  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  the  Surgeons'  Company  of 
London  to  receive  an  apprentice,  if  duly  qualified. (i)  As  to  pauper  ap- 
prentices, see  tit.  Poor. 

Approved  Men  or  Guildford.]  See  tits.  Ashhurton,  &c. ;  Guild- 
ford, &c. 

Approver  of  Guns.]     See  tits.  Gunmalcers'   Company ;   Office. 

Arbitrator.]  Umpire,  Ajypointment. — It  lies  to  command  an  arbi- 
trator, under  an  act  of  Parliament,  to  appoint  an  umpire. (7) 

Archdeacon.]  Admission — It  lies  to  admit  to  the  office  of  arch- 
dcacon,(7i-)  and  as  a  dean  and  chapter  who  have  power  to  make  bye-laws, 
cannot  by  virtue  of  that  power  make  a  bye-law,  that  an  archdeacon  shall 
take  the  oath  of  canonical  obedience,  and  to  keep  the  secrets  of  the 
chapter,  before  he  is  admitted  into  his  office,  so  the  refusal  to  take  such 
an  oath  at  such  time  is  not  a  good  return  to  such  a  mandamus. (/) 

But  a  return  to  such  a  writ  of  non  fuit  clectus,  is  good.(»i) 

.]  Restoration. — It  lies  also  to  restore  to  the  office  of  archdea- 
con.(«) 

.]     Liahility  of. — An  archdeacon  being  within  the  general  rule 

on  this  subject,  is  not  liable  to  an  action  for  swearing  in,  &c.  a  wrong 
r*4Rl  P^^'^*^'^  *under  the  authority  of  a  mandamus. (0)  ^Vs  to  the  office  of 
'-  archdeacon's  register,  see  tit.   Registrar. 

(/)  Foulke's  case,  cited  in  R.  v.  Dr.  "VVard,  1  Barn.  295,  in  S.  C.  Stra.  897  ;  and 
in  R.  V.  Canterbury  (Archbishop),  8  East,  218. 

ig)  See  stat.  21  Hen.  8,  c.  5. 

{h)  See  tit.  "  Office."  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."(D.)  And  see  tit.  "  Office"  (Officers, 
Ministerial,  Inferior). 

(?)  R.  V.  Surgeons'  Company,  Burr.  892,  where  see  form  of  writ  and  return. 

{j)  R.  V.  Goodrich,  2  Smith,  388.  See  tit.  "  Act  of  Parliament."  See  tit. 
"Award." 

{k)  R.  V.  Trinity  Chapel  (Dean),  8  Mod.  27,  and  see  Gastrell  v.  Jones,  2  Roll. 
449;  6  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Serement"  (B.)  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  171,  per  Keeling,  C. 
J.,  Register,  307,  331.     See  tit.  "Office."  (/)  Id. 

im)  Hereford's  case,  1  Sid.  209,  210.     S.  C.  1  Keb.  655,  660,  716. 

[n)  R.  V.  Lambert,  12  Mod.  3.  S.  C.  Carth.  170,  nom.  Lambert's  case,  where  it 
is  stated  to  be  the  office  of  "  Register,"  &c. 

(0)  R.  V.  London,  (Mayor)  10  Mod.  53,  54,  citing  1  Roll.  108,  and  sec  stat.  6  & 
1  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  App. 


AS  II  BURTON,     EIOHT     MEN     OF,     ETC. 


93 


Armourers  and  Braziers.]     Sec  tits.  Company;  Freedom  (^Com- 

Articles  of  Peace.]     See  tit.  Peace,  Articles' of. 

Ashburton,  Eight  Men  op.]  Restoration. — A  mandamus  has  been 
granted  to  restore  to  the  office  of  one  of  the  "  eight  men  of  Ashbur- 
ton ;"(7>)  it  having  been  cited  that  a  mandamus  had  been  granted  to  swear 
one  of  the  "  twenty-four  men  of  Tiverton,"  they  having  no  other  name. 
And  the  Court,  in  granting  the  application  in  the  principal  case,  ordered 
the  mandamus  specially  to  recite  therein  so  much  of  the  office  as  would 
make  it  appear  to  be  the  proper  subject  of  a  writ  of  mandamus. (<^) 

In  another  case,(?-)  a  mandamus  is  stated  to  have  been  applied  for  to 
"swear  in  one  who  was  elected  to  be  one  of  the  eight  men  of  Ashburn 
Court;"  which  was  (according  to  that  report)  denied  for  its  uncertainty, 
for  it  ought  specially  to  have  expressed  what  the  office  was,  and  what  was 
the  place  of  the  "  eight  men,"  that  it  might  appear  to  the  Court  to  be 
such  a  place  for  which  a  mandamus  lay,  and  the  Court  further  remarked, 
that  though  such  a  writ  had  been  granted  for  one  "  of  the  approved  men 
of  Guildford,"  yet  it  was  specially  set  forth  what  his  office  was.(s) 

Assessors.]     See  tit.  Burgess  Roll. 

Attorney.]  A  mandamus  will  be  granted  in  respect  of  the  office  of 
an  attorney  of  an  inferior  Court,  it  being  one  of  public  concern,  because 
it  regards  the  administration  of  justice,  and  also  because  there  is  no  other 
remedy.  (^) 

This  title  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


Attorney. 

To  practice 

Admission 


Attorney. 

43 

Restoration     -         -         - 

-     44 

44 

Delivery  up  of  Rolls,  &c. 

-     45 

.]      To  Practice. — It  will  be  granted  to  allow  one  duly  entitled, 

to  practice  in  an  inferior  Court,(^f)  as  the  inferior  Court  of  Reading  ;(r) 


*Havcring  Court,  Essex;  the  Stepney  Court,  &e.,  and  the  Lord 


[*44] 


Mayor  of  London's  Court  ;(?r)  but  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  lend 

its  assistance  to  an  attorney  of  a  superior  Court  to  allow  him  to  practise 


{p)  R.  V.  Exeter,  (Dean)  2  Show.  217.  S.  C.  2  Mod.  316;  3  Bac.  Abr.  530. 
Trem.  pi.  Cor.  467,  468,  where  see  form  of  writ. 

(q)  See  R.  v.  Guildford,  (Approved  Men  of,)   1  Lev.  162.     S.  C.  RajTU.  152. 

(r)  2  Mod.  316.     R.  v.  Exeter.  (Dean.) 

\s)  See  tits.  "  Guildford,"  (Approved  men),  "Tiverton,"  (twenty-four-men  of.) 

{t)  Lee's  case,  Carth.  '169,  170.  "White's  case,  6  Mod.  18  per  Holt.,  C.  J.  Leigh's 
case,  3  Mod.  335.     See  tits.  "  Courts,  Inferior." 

(m)  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  1268.  See  R.  v.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233,  13.  R.  v.  London, 
(Mayor),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  185  ;  Q.  B.,  where  see  form  of  writ. 

(v)  1  Vent.    11 ;  1  Sid.  410.  1  Mod.  23;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C. 

\w)  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  185,  Q.  B.  A  writ  of  error  is,  however,  pending  against  this 
decision. 


94  tapping's     MANDAMUS. 


in  sue 


acb  inferior  Court  as  he  may  do  so  of  right,  unless  the  number  be 

limited  to  the  exclusion  of  others  by  act  of  Parliament,  charter,  prescrip- 
tion, &c.,  and  then  he  will  require  an  appointment. (:r) 

.]     A(hnission. — It  lies  also  to  admit  an  attorney  of  the  Court  of 

the  Sheriffs  of  York.(^)  So  of  the  Marshal's  or  other  Court.(.~)  But  if 
the  Court  of  B.  11.  has  no  jurisdiction  or  power  to  enforce  admittance,  &c.. 
the  writ  will  be  refused.  Thus  a  rule  for  a  mandamus  to  the  principal 
and  ancients  of  Barnard's  Inn  to  admit  an  attorney  into  the  Society  was 
discharged,  as  it  was  not  shown  that  the  Court  had  the  requisite  authority 
over  the  Inn. (a)  But  it  seems  a  mandamus  should  not  issue  to  the 
Judges  of  an  inferior  Court,  commanding  them,  in  the  first  instance,  to 
admit  an  attorney  of  B.  R.  to  practise  there,  but  that  the  mandamus,  if 
any  lies,  must  be  to  examine  whether  he  is  capable  and  qualified  to  be 
admitted  according  to  the  stats.  2  Geo.  2,  c.  23,  and  6  Geo.  2,  c.  21. (h) 

.]     Restoration. — So  it  will  be  granted  to  restore  an  attorney  to 

his  place  in  an  inferior  Court. (c)  Thus  it  lies  to  restore  an  attorney  of 
the  Sheriff's  Court  of  York.(f/)  So  to  restore  an  attorney  within  the 
liberty  of  St.  Martyn  le  Grand. (e)  So  to  restore  an  attorney  of  the 
Borough  Court  of  Southwark,(/)  or  of  the  Court  of  the  Corporation  of 
Colchester.(^)  So  it  was  granted  after  many  arguments  and  much  deli- 
beration, to  restore  an  attorney  of  the  town  Court  of  Canterbury,  it  not 
being  such  an  office  with  which  the  commissioners  for  corporations  bad 
power  to  intermeddle. (/i)  *So  it  has  been  granted  to  restore  an 
L  -I  attorney  improperly  suspended  from  practising  in  the  Courts  of 
the  County  Palatine  of  Chester.     But  a  return  of  suspension  for  speaking 

(x)  Oilman  v.  Wright,  1  Sid.  410.  S.  C.  1  Ventr.  11  S.  C.  2  Keb.  477,  584. 
Hurst's  case,  Raym.  56,  94.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  94.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  75,  citing  Underwood's 
case.  Basting's  case,  1  Sid.  410.  S.  C.  1  Mod.  23.  Anon.,  March,  141.  R.  v. 
York,  (Sheriffs,)  3  B.  &  Ad.  775  jf  But  see  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  18G,  Q.  B. 

(y)  R.  V.  York  (Sheriffs),  3  B.  &  Ad.  770-1 

(z)  See  1  Sid.  93,  152.  Ray.  56,  94;  1  Lev.  75,  supra.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man." 
(A.) 

(a)  See  ante,  pp.  10,  11.     R.  v.  Barnards  Inn,  5  A.  &  E.  l7.f 

(6)  R.  V.  York  (Sheriffs),  3  B.  &  Ad.  770,  781.f  And  see  1  Mod.  23.  S.  C.  1 
Sid.  410.     S.  C.  1  Vent.  11  Supra. 

(c)  Leigh's  case,  3  Mod.  333,  citing  Hurst  v.  Canterbury,  (Mayor),  1  Sid.  94.  S. 
C.  152.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  75.  S.  C.  Raym.  56,  94.  See  R.  v.  Rushworth  Kely.  288. 
R.  V.  Raines,  3  Salk.  232,  13.  Ajion.,  March,  141.  R.  v.  Oxenden,  1  Show.  219; 
Keb.  549.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C. 

(d)  R.  V.  York  (Sheriff's),  2  Show.  154. 

(f)  Collin's  case,  1  Keb.  549,  also  cited  in  Hurst's  case,  1  Sid.  152;  and  see  1 
Lev.  75.  See  also,  R.  v.  Canterbury,  (Archbishop),  8  East,  216.  The  writ  should 
be  directed  to  the  steward.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 

(/■)  Underhill's  case  cited  in  Hurst's  case,  1  Keb.  287,  and  in  S.  C.  1  Lev.  75. 
S.  C.  1  Sid.  152. 

[ff]  R.  V.  Colchester  (Town),  2  Keb.  188. 

(h)  Hurst's  case,  Raym.  94,  56,  (the  applicant  having  been  improperly  removed 
l)y  the  Commissioners  for  Corporations  acting  under  the  Statute  of  Corporations.) 
S.  C.  1  Lev.  75.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  94  (citing  Underwood's  case)  S.  C.  1  Keb.  349, 
354,  387,  (Twysden  saying,  that  as  the  writ  was  grounded  on  Magna  Charta,  that 
none  should  be  disseised  of  liberties  or  franchises,  that  therefore,  the  mandamus 
should  be  granted,  558,  675,  cited  also  in  R.  v.  Canterbury,  (Archbishop),  8  East, 
216.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C. 


AWARD,     ETC. 


95 


contemptuous  words  of  the  presiding  Judge  is  good.(t)     So  it  has  been 
granted  to  restore  one  of  the  attorneys  of  the  Marshalsea  Court. (_;") 

.]     Rolls  (Mlvcri/,  kc. — The  Court  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  to 

a  manor  steward  being  an  attorney  to  deliver  up  Court  rolls,  &c.,  there 
being  another  remedy. (A;) 

Auditor  of  Chamberlain's    and  Bridgemaster's    Accounts.] 

Admission. — It  lies  to  command  an  admission  to  the  office  of  auditor  of 
chamberlain's  and  bridgemaster's  accounts,  if  duly  elected.(0 

Auditor  of  Churchwarden's  Accounts.     See  tit.  Churchwarden. 

Auditor  of  Overseer's  Accounts.]     See  titles   Churchwarden; 
Overseers. 

Auditor  OF  Parish  Accounts.]  See  titles  Chirchwarden ;  Over- 
seer i^aaoinits  ;)  Parish  (auditor.') 

Augmented  Curacy.     See  tit.  Curacy  (augmented.) 
Autrefois  Acquit.]     See  tit.  Cotirts  Inferior  (Records.) 

Award].  Enforcing. — It  lies  to  enforce  the  payment  by  a  company, 
of  money  which  an  arbitrator  has  awarded  to  be  paid  by  its  treasurer. 
But  it  was  so  held  expressly  on  the  ground  that  the  action  on  the  award 
could  only  be  against  the  treasurer,  and  that  his  body  and  goods  were 
exempted  from  execution  by  the  statute  incorporating  the  company. (m) 

Bailiff.]     The  writ  lies  for  the  office  of  bailiff  of  a  borough. (?«) 

],  election. — It  lies  on  stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  s.  2,  to  go  to  the 

*election  of  bailiffs,  and  to  command  the  holding  of  a  Court  for  ^  ^^g  -, 
that  purpose,  (o) 

,  ajyplication,  dr. — See  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89, (p)  as  to  the  neces- 
sary steps  to  be  taken,  before  making  the  application,  in  order  to  obtain 
costs. 

((')  Parker's  case,  1  Vent  331,  and  see  "Mandamus,"  2  Lent.  1014,  for  form  of 
such  return  which  in  1  Vent.  331,  supra,  was  held  to  be  good.  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  516, 
where  see  form  of  writ. 

(j)  Underwood's  case,  Ann.,  1651,  cited  in  Hurst's  case,  1  Sid.  94. 

[k)  R.  V.  Earle,  Burr.  1197.  But  see  tits.  "Corporation,  Municipal"  (Insignia.) 
"Manor"  (Rolls.) 

(I)  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  1  T.  R.  423. 

(m)  R.  T.  St.  Katharine's  Dock,  4  B.  &  Ad.  360.t  S.  G.  1  N.  &  ]\I.  121,t  also  cited 
in  R.  V.  Nottingham  Water  Works,  6  A.  &  E.  365.  See  tits.  "Inclosurc,"  "  Arbi- 
tration," "  Money,"  Company"  (Execution.) 

(n)  R.  3  Rol.  456,  1.  20,  32.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  Scarborough's  case, 
Stra.  1180  ;  and  see  also  Stra.  1003,  1157  ;  see  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20;  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4, 
and  1  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  26,  App.  See  tit.  "  Office." 

(o)  See  stat.  App.  R.  v.  Woodrow,  2  T.  R.  732.  Scarborough's  case,  Stra.  1130. 
R.  V.  Maiden,  (BailiflFs),  2  Salk.  431.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  481. 

(/>)  Appendix. 


96  tapping's    mandamus. 

,]  admit  and  swear. — It  lies  to  admit  and  swear  into  the  office  of 


bailiffs  of  a  corporation (5)  or  of  a  town.(r) 

,]  restoration. — It  also  lies  to  restore  to  the  ofEce  of  bailifif  if 

improperly  disfranchised,  (s) 

Bailiff  of  Manor.]     See  tit.  Manor  (Bailiff.) 

Bank  of  England.]  Transfer  of  stock. — The  Court  will  not  grant 
a  mandamus  to  command  the  Bank  of  England  to  transfer  stock,  because 
there  is  a  remedy  by  an  action  on  the  case  if  they  refuse,  which  action 
would  afford  a  satisfaction  equivalent  to  a  specific  relief. (<) 

,]  accounts. — Nor  will  the  Court  command  the  Bank  of  England, 

at  the  instance  of  one  of  its  members,  to  produce  an  account  of  the  income 
and  profits  of  a  certain  period,  with  an  account  of  the  charges  of  manage- 
ment, for  the  purpose  of  enabling  the  next  general  Court  to  consider  the 
state  and  condition  of  the  company,  and  to  declare  a  dividend,  in  the 
absence  of  any  parliamentary  dii'ection  that  such  accounts  should  be  pro- 
duced. For  such  an  application  is  in  effect  made  by  one  on  behalf  of 
several  partners  to  compel  his  co-partners  to  produce  their  accounts  of 
profit  and  loss,  and  to  divide  those  profits,  if  any  there  be ;  a  subject  over 
which  the  Court  of  Chancery  has  alone  jurisdiction. (?/) 

Bankrupt.]  Further  examination. — It  lies  to  command  commis- 
sioners of  bankrupt  to  issue  their  w^arrant  for  a  further  examination  of  a 
bankrupt,  on  a  suggestion  that  he  is  desirous  of  fully  disclosing  his  estate 
and  effects,  although  the  bankrupt  had  been  previously,  after  repeated 
examinations,  finally  committed  by  the  commissioners  for  not  having  satis- 
factorily answered. (v)  But  it  has  also  been  decided,  that  where  a  party 
has  been  committed  for  not  having  answered  satisfactorily  before  the  com- 
P  ^ , »,  -,  missioners  he  may  have  a  habeas  corpus  to  bring  him  before  the 
^  commissioners  for  further  *examinaJ;ion,  but  cannot,  by  a  man- 

damus, throw  the  expense  of  bringing  him  up  on  the  state.  (%•) 

.]      Certificate. — It  does  not  lie  to  command  the  commissioners  of 

bankrupt  to  sign  a  certificate  of  a  bankrupt's  conformity,  because  a  dis- 
cretion is  vested  in  the  commissioners,  of  which  the  Court  cannot  enforce 
the  exercise  in  any  particular  way.(./) 

[q)  R.  v.  Ipswich  (Bailiffs),  1  Barnard.  407.  Yaughan  v.  Lewis,  Garth.  227.  See 
tit.  "Corporation,"  (Municipal.) 

(r)  R.  V.  Clithroe  (Town),  6  Mod.  133. 

\s)  Tompson  v.  Edmonds,  2  Rol.  Ab.  45G,  pi.  4,  T.,  4  Jac.  B.  R. 

\t)  R.  V.  Bank  of  England,  1  Doner.  524.  See  also  R.  v.  Nottingham  Water 
Works,  G  A.  &  E.  364.f     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  '•  Man."  C.  2.     See  Ante,  p.  20. 

(m)  R.  v.  England  (Bank),  2  B.  &  A.  G22.  See  R.  v.  Wilts.  Canal,  3  A.  &  E. 
482.-J-     See  ante,  p.  22.     See  tit.  "  Company"  (Duties,  &c.). 

[v)  In  re  Bromley,  3  D.  &  R.  310.f  And  see  R.  v.  Surrey,  6  Tr.  R.  77.  See  tit. 
"  Insolvent." 

(w)  Ex  parte  Bagster,  2  M.  &  R.  467. 

(z)  In  re  King,  7  East,  90,  n.  (a),  and  cited  in  15  East,  126,  and  9  East,  88.  See 
ante,  pp.  12,  13. 


BASTARDS,     ETC.  97 

Barnard's  Inn,  Attorney  OF.]  8ee  titles  AttomcT/ ;  Innof  Clmn- 
cery. 

BARon,  Court.]  See  tit.  Manor  (^Baron.) 

Baron  and  Feme.]     See  titles  Administration;  Alimony. 

Barrister-at-Law.]     See  tit.  Inn  of  Court. 

Bastards.]  It  lies  to  command  justices  of  the  peace  to  proceed  gene- 
rally in  all  matters  as  to  bastard  children,  within  their  jurisdiction. (y) 
Thus  it  has  been  granted  to  command  justices  of  the  peace  to  take  the 
examination  of  a  pauper  touching  the  reputed  father  of  a  bastard  child  of 
which  she  was  pregnant,  and  also  to  issue  their  summons  to  such  putative 
father,  commanding  his  appearance  before  them,  to  answer  for  having  dis- 
obeyed an  order  of  bastardy  made  upon  him  xmdcr  stat.  49  Geo.  3,  c.  68, 
s.  3.(s)  And  also  to  command  them  to  hear  and  determine  an  applica- 
tion for  a  bastardy  order  which  they  have  improperly  refused  to  pro- 
ceed with,(o)  but  not  to  make  an  order  of  maintenance  on  a  particular 
parish. (i) 

So  it  lies  to  command  them  to  receive  and  enter  an  application  for  an 
order  of  maintenance  upon  the  putative  father  of  a  bastard  under  stats. 
4  &  5  Wm.  4,  c.  76,  s.  72;  7  &  8  Vict.  c.  101,  and  8  Vict.  c.  10.  (c) 

•]     Appeal. — It  lies  also  to  command  justices  at  quarter  sessions 

to  cause  continuances  to  be  entered,  and  to  hear  an  appeal  against  an  order 
of  affiliation  of  two  magistrates,  under  stats.  49  Geo.  3,  c.  68,  s.  5,  and 
7  &  8  Vict.  c.  101,  (fZ)  or  any  appeal  against  such  an  order  which  they 
ought  to  have  heard  ;(e)  but  not  if  the  sessions  have  no  jurisdiction,  or 
*have  properly  dismissed  the  appeal,  on  the  ground  of  a  defective  ^^,q-, 
notice  of  appeal  or  otherwise. (/)  '- 

An  appeal  does  not  lie  to  command  the  justices  at  sessions  to  enter  con- 
tinuances and  hear  an  appeal  against  an  order  of  affiliation  duly  made  by 

[y)  R.  T.  Surrey  (J.),  2  Show.  T4.     Bott's  Poor  Law,  by  Const,  4C,  61,  207. 

iz)  R.  V.  Martyr,  13  East,  55. 

\a)  Ex  parte  Wallingford  Union,  9  Dowl.  987.  R.  v.  Walker,  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  120, 
M.  C.     S.  C.  3  D.  &  L.  131. 

(6)  R.  V.  Middx.  (J),  4  B.  &  A.  298.  See  R.  v.  Eye  (Corp.),  4  B.  &  A.  271.  R. 
Y.  Truro  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  A.  590  ;  2  Chitt.  257.t 

(c)  R.  V.  Cambridgesh.  (J.)  R.  v.  Salop  (J.)  R.  v.  Gloucestersh.  (J.),  1  P.  & 
D.  249.  S.  C.  7  A.  &  E.  480.t  S.  C.  9  A.  &  E.  SSB.f  R.  v.  Bridgman,  15  L.  J., 
N.  S.  44,  M.  0.  R.  V.  Chesh.  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  114,  M.  0.  R.  v.  Hincliffe,  16  L. 
J.,  N.  S.  78,  M.  C. 

(d)  R.  V.  Salop  (J.),  4  B.  &  A.  626.  R.  v.  Flintsh.  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  50,  M.  C. 
Ex  parte  Lowe,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  99,  M.  C.  S.  C.  3  D.  &  L.  737.  R.  v.  Chesh.  (J.), 
15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  114,  M.  C.     S.  C.  4  D.  &  L.  94. 

(e)  Ex  parte  Becke,  3  B.  &  Ad.  704.f  R.  v.  Lincolnsh.  (J.),  3  B.  &  C.  548.f  R. 
V.  Oxfordsh.  (J.),  1  B.  &  C.  279.1  R.  v.  Gloucestersh.  (J.),  2  D.  &  R.  426.1  R.  v. 
Oxfordsh.  (J.),  5  D.  116.     R.  v.  Lincolnsh.  (J.),  5  D.  &  R.  347-1 

(/)  2  D.  &  R.  426,1  and  cases  supra.  See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions."  See  ante, 
p.  29. 

April,  1852.— 7 


98  tapping's     MANDAMUS. 

two  justices  at  petty  sessions,  under  stat.  2  &  3  Vict.  c.  85,  s.  1,  as  no 
appeal  lies  in  such  case.(^) 

.]     Costs. — It  however  lies  to  command  justices  to  make  an  order 

upon  certain  guardians  of  the  poor  to  pay  costs  incurred  in  resisting  an 
application  made  by  such  guardians  under  stats.  4  &  5  Wm.  4,  c.  76,  s. 
73,  and  2  &  3  Vict.  c.  85,  s.  1,  for  the  maintenance  of  a  bastard  child,  if 
the  application  has  been  fully  heard. (/t)  For  in  all  cases  in  which  the 
Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  dismisses  an  application  under  stat.  4  &  5  Wm. 
4,  c.  76,  s.  73,  for  an  order  of  bastardy,  on  the  ground  that  it  is  not  made 
by  the  proper  parties,  it  is  bound  to  award  to  the  person  intended  to  be 
charged  his  costs  of  resisting  the  application,  and,  on  refusal,  a  mandamus 
lies  to  command  them  so  to  do.(i) 

.]     Enforcing  order  of  affiliation. — So  the  Court  will,  by  writ  of 

mandamus,  command  a  justice  or  justices  to  enforce  an  order  of  aflfilia- 
tion-O') 

But  it  lies  not  to  command  a  justice  to  convict  under  stat.  5  Geo.  4, 
c.  83,  a  single  woman  for  having  run  away  and  left  her  bastard  child,  as 
that  statute  applies  to  legitimate  and  not  to  illegitimate  children.  (/.;) 

Bedford  Level.]  liccciver ;  Restoration. — It  lies  to  command  the 
conservators  of  the  Bedford  Level  to  restore  their  receiver,  if  improperly 
removed,  they  being  incorporated  by  stat.  15  Car.  2,  and  thereby  required 
to  appoint  a  collector  and  receiver. (?) 

.]     Rcfjistrar,  admit  and  swear. — The  writ  will  be  granted  to 

command  the  Bedford  Level  Corporation  to  admit  and  swear  into  the 
office  of  registrar  of  such  corporation,  his  duty  being  a  public  one,  that  is, 
to  register  titles  and  deeds  relating  to  lands  within  the  level ;  as  to  which 
he  takes  an  oath  of  office.  It  has  also  been  settled  that  an  information  in 
the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto  does  not  lie  against  him,  he  being  a  mere 
r  *dq  1  servant  of  *the  corporation,  and  his  office  not  affecting  any  franchise 
or  other  authority  held  under  the  Crown. (??i) 

As  to  Drainage,  see  tit.  Drainaye. 

Bermudas — Company  of  Traders  to.]     Restoration  of  Member. — 

iff)  R.  T.  West.  R.  (J.),  4  P.  &  D.  668.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  325.t 

(h)  R.  V.  Ld.  Hastings,  1  D.  &  M.  132.  S.  C.  6  Q.  B.  141.t  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
Ill,  M.  C.  R.  V.  Exeter  (Recorder),  3  G.  &  D.  IGT.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  342.f  S.  C.  13 
L.  J.,  N.  S.  1,  M.  C.     See  tit.  "Poor,"  (Costs). 

(t)  3  G.  &  D.  167.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  342,t  supra.  R.  v.  Monmoutsh.  (J.),  12  L.  J. 
R.,  N.  S.,  M.  C.  126 ;  and  see  T  &  8  Vict.  101,  s.  1,  9. 

(y )  R.  V.  Codd,  1  P.  &  D.  456.     S.  C.  9  A.  &  E.  682.f   R.  v.  Martyr,  13  East,  55. 

(k)  R.  V.  Maude,  2  D.,  N.  S.  58.  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  120,  M.  C.  See  tit.  «  Quar- 
ter Sessions,"  "Justice." 

[I)  Anon.,  1  Barn.  195.  In  this  case,  however,  the  applicant  was  not  turned  out 
by  the  then  directors,  and  upon  that  point  (which  is  not  clear,)  the  mandamus  was 
granted.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration.) 

(m)  R.  V.  Bedford  Level,  6  East,  356,  and  cases  there  cited.  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"  Man."  C. 


B I  s  n  0  p,   E  T  c.  99 

It  lies  to  command  the  restoration  of  one  to  be  a  member  and  assistant  to 
the  company  of  traders  to  the  Bermudas.  («) 

Births,  Registrar  of.]     See  tit.  Registrar  of  Births. 

Bishop.]     Absolution. — See  such  title. 

.]     Chrism. — It  has  been  granted  to  command  a  bishop  to  give 

oil  to  a  priest  with  which  to  baptize. (o) 

.]      Confirmation. — See  such  title. 

.]     Consecration. — It  does  not  lie  to  command  the  consecration  of 

abishop.(j>) 

.]     Sacrament. — See  titles  ^Sacramcwf ;  Prebendary. 

.]      Visitation. — See  tit.  Visitation. 

.]     Apxolication  ;   Costs. — If  an  application  for  a  writ  of  mandamus 

for  any  cause  be  made  against  a  bishop  without  good  foundation,  it  will 
be  discharged  with  costs.($)  But  if  the  point  raised  be  new  and  doubtful, 
the  Court  will  not,  in  its  discretion,  inflict  costs. (r) 

Blacksmith's  Company,  Clerk  of.]  Delivery  of  Boohs,  &c. — It 
lies  to  command  the  delivery,  by  the  late  clerk  of  the  Blacksmiths'  Com- 
pany, of  all  books,  papers,  &c.,  which  he  had  obtained  possession  of  by  rea- 
son of  being  such  clerk,  and  from  which  ofl&ce  he  had  been  removed,  (rr) 

Blue  Coat  School.]  Restoration  of  Schokir. — It  lies  not  to  restore 
a  blue  coat,  he  being  but  an  almsman,  and  under  the  jurisdiction  of  a 
visitor,  (s) 

Bond.]     See  tit.  Compensation  (Bond). 

Bond — High  Constable's.]     See  tit.  Constable. 

Books,  Records,  Official  Papers,  &c.]  Delivery. — The  party  enti- 
tled *to  a  public  oflSce  has  a  right  to  the  books  and  papers  apper-  r  ^r /^  -, 
taining  to  such  office,  and  the  Court  will  command  the  delivery  L  -■ 
of  them  over  by  mandamus.  But  one  who  has  a  legal  right  to  an 
office  is  not  entitled  to  have  books  delivered  by  one  who  has  an  equitable 
right,  and,  therefore,  a  writ  for  that  purpose  would,  in  such  a  case,  be 
refused.  (<)     So  that  where  two  persons  are  contending  for  an  office,  for 

(n)  Trott's  case,  2  Keb.  693.  See  tit.  "Company,"  "  Corporation"  (Municipal), 
"Franchise,"  "Freedom." 

(o)  See  tit.  "  Chrism." 

(  »)  Dr.  Robert's  case,  2  Keb.  102,  per  Windham,  J. 

\q)  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396,  405.  R.  t.  Oxford  (Ep.),  1  East,  GOO,  606. 
See  tit.  "  Costs." 

(r)  R.  V.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  159. 

(rr)  R.  V.  Wildman,  Stra.  8T9.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  402.  The  rule  should  be  for  the 
delivery,  &c.,  to  the  company,  and  not  to  the  new  clerk.     See  tit.  "  Books,"  &c. 

(s)  R.  V.  Wheeler,  3  Keb.  360.  See  tits.  "Charity,"  "Charter  House  School," 
"College,"  "  School,"  "Visitor." 

(t)  Town  Clerk  of  Nottingham's   case,  1  Sid.  31.    R.  v.  Wheeler,  1  Bam.  99. 


100 


tapping's    mandamus. 


which  quo  warranto  will  not  lie,  the  right  to  it  may  always  be  tried  by  a 
mantlamus  to  give  up  papers  relating  to  it.(?/) 

.]     Deposit. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  a  public  officer  to  deposit 

a  public  document  where  it  is  directed  to  be  deposited  according  to  act  of 
Parliament,  (u) 

.]  Form  of  Writ. — The  writ  to  deliver  books,  &c.,may  be  direct- 
ed not  only  to  him  who  has  them,  but  also  to  all  those  who  were  assistant 
in  carrying  them  away.(«) 

Books  op  Borougu.]     See  tit.  Borowjh  {Books). 

Books  of  Company.]     See  tit.  Company  {Books,  <fcc.) 

Books  of  County.]     See  tit.  County  {Accounts,  Boohs,  &c.) 

Borough.]     This  title  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


3UGH. 

Borough. 

Borough  officers     - 

-     50 

Rate — Defaulters 

-     51 

Borough  fund 

-     50 

Rate  Books    -         -        - 

-     52 

Rate      -        -        -        - 

-     51 

Inspection,  &c. 

-     52 

Appeal  against 

-     51 

Delivery 

-     52 

.]     Borough  Officers. — As  to  the  election,  &c.  of  such  officers,  see 

post,  tit.  Office,  d'c.,  and  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89. (a:) 

.]  Borough  Fund. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  municipal  corpo- 
ration to  pay  out  of  the  borough  fund  certain  sums  incurred  in  respect  of 
the  expenses  or  costs  of  carrying  into  effect  the  provisions  of  stat.  5  &  6 
Wm.  4,  c.  76.  Thus  fees  which  a  justice's  clerk  in  a  borough  is  author- 
ized to  take,  by  a  table  regularly  allowed  and  confirmed  under  stat.  5  &  6 
Wm.  4,  c.  76,  s.  124,  in  respect  of  charges  against  persons  apprehended 
and  brought  *before  the  borough  justices  by  constables  appointed 
L  -^  by  the  watch  committee,  and  disposed  of  by  such  justices;  and 
which  fees  the  clerk  to  the  justices  cannot  recover  from  such  persons  or 
other  parties,  either  on  account  of  their  not  being  specifically  imposed  on 
them  by  act  of  Parliament,  or  from  their  inability  to  pay,  are  "  expenses 
necessarily  incurred  in  carrying  into  effect  the  provisions  of  the  act"  under 
section  92,  and  a  mandamus  will  go  to  direct  their  payment  out  of  the- 
borough  fund.(y)     But  a  mandamus  will  not  lie,  to  command  the  pay 

Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  (B.);  .3  Bl.  Com.  110.  See  tits.  "  Attorney,"  "  Black- 
miths'  Company,"  "  Company,"  "  Corporation,  Municipal"  (Insignia),  "  Insignia," 
"  Records,"  "  Seal."     See  ante,  pp.  27,  28. 

(w)  R.  V.  Hopkins,  1  Q.  B.  161.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  551,  per  Pollock,  arg.,  and  see 
there  form  of  writ  and  return. 

(v)  R.  V.  Payne,  6  A.  &  E.  402.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524,f  per  Coleridge,  J.  See 
tit.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Attorney." 

(w)  R.  V.  Holford,  2  Barn.  350.  Anon.,  1  Barn.  402.  So  in  the  Roman  law  it 
is  a  rule  that  "  Is  damnum  dat,  qui  jubet  dare  :  ejus  vero  nulla  culpa  est,  cui  parere 
necesse  sit."     D.  50,  17,  169. 

(x)  Appendix. 

(y)  R.  V.  Gloucester  (Mayor),  1  D.  &  M.  G7  7.     S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  862.t    S.  C.  13  L. 


BOROUGH.  101 

ment  over  of  money  to  the  treasurer  of  a  borough,  under  stat.  5  &  G  Wm. 
4,  c.  76,  s.  92,  unless  the  application  be  made  cither  by  the  treasurer  or 
after  he  has  been  required  to  demand  the  payment;  and  this,  although 
the  party  applying  for  the  writ  be  ultimately  entitled  to  the  money.  (^) 

.]     Rate. — The  Court  will,  in  some  instances,  order  the  making 

of  a  borough  rate,(a)  but  it  will  not  order  the  payment  of  past  expenses, 
which  would  render  a  retrospective  rate  necessary. (Z^)  But  such  an  ob- 
jection can  only  arise  upon  the  return,  for  until  that  time  there  is  nothing 
to  shew,  but  that  there  are  funds  in  the  hands  of  the  defendants. (6)  So 
the  Court  will,  for  a  proper  purpose,  command  a  corporation  to  enforce 
payment  of  the  existing  borough  rates,  or  cause  to  be  collected  another 
rate ;  but  such  a  writ  must  shew  that  the  existing  borough  fund  is  insuf- 
ficient, or  it  will  be  informal,  and  such  an  objection  may  be  used  as  an 
answer  to  a  rule  for  an  attachment  against  those  who  refuse  compliance. (c) 

.]     Appeal  against  Rate. — It  lies  to  command  a  recorder,  &c.  to 

enter  continuances  and  hear  an  appeal  against  a  borough  rate,  where  an 
express  power  of  appeal  is  given,(c/)  as  by  stat.  5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  76,  s. 
92,(e)  and  the  subject-matter  is  not  of  Ecclesiastical  jurisdiction. (/) 

.]     Defaulters. — So  it  lies  to  command  justices  to  issue  a  distress 

warrant  to  levy  a  borough  rato,(y)  but  where  the  legality  of  such  a  war- 
rant is  not  clear,  the  Court  will  not,  by  mandamus,  command  the  justices 
to  issue  it.(/t) 

So  it  lies  to  command  magistrates  to  issue  a  warrant  of  distress  for  non- 
payment of  '^paving  and  lighting  rates  of  a  borough. (i)  But  the  r^r^cy  -i 
Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  to  justices  of  Middle-  ^ 
sex  commanding  them  to  issue  such  distress  warrants  for  rates  made  in  any 
district  within  the  metropolis,  but  will  leave  the  commissioners,  or  other 
persons  having  the  control  of  the  pavements  of  the  district,  to  their  remedy 
by  action,  under  stat.  57  Greo.  3,  c.  29,  s.  38. (y) 

J.,  N.  S.  233,  Q.  B.  But  see  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Maj'or).  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  82,  Q.  B.  R. 
V.  Lichfield,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  333,  Q.  B.  See  R.  v.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  728.  S. 
C.  1  Q.  B.  616. 

M  R.  V.  Frost,  8  A.  &  E.  822.t     S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  T5. 

\a)  See  tits.  "  County  Rate,"  "  Poor  rate,"  &c. 

{b)  Woods  T.  Reed,  2  M.  &  W.  777,*  cited  in  R.  v.  Gloucester,  1  D.  &  M.  681. 
S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  862.+ 

(c)  R.  V.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  728.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  Gie.f 

\d]  R.  T.  Ipswicli  (R.),  8  D.  103,  citing  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  2  T.  R.  504.  R.  v. 
Bath  (R.),  1  P.  &  D.  622.  R.  v.  Bond,  6  A.  &  E.  909.f  R.  v.  Poole  (R.),  1  N.  & 
P.  756.f     See  tits.  "Poor  Rate,"  "Quarter  Sessions." 

(e)  R.  V.  Bond,  6  A.  &  E.  905.f  R.  v.  Bath  (R.),  9  A.  &  E.  872-1  R.  v.  Carmar- 
ben  (R.),7  A.  &  E.  756.+ 

(/)  R.  V.  St.  Saviour's,  7  A.  &  E.  925.1  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  126.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
496.+     See  tit.  "  Church-rate." 

[g)  R.  V.  Trecothick,  2  A.  &  E.  405.t  R.  v.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  728.  S. 
C.  1  Q.  B.  616.+     See  tit.  "Compensation,"  (Office  Payment). 

(A)  R.  V.  Dyer,  2  A.  &  E.  611.t  S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  SSO.f  R.  v.  Barker,  6  A.  &  E. 
SOl.f  2  A.  &  E.  644.f  S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  394.t  But  see  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions," 
and  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  App. 

U)  R.  V.  Hughes,  3  A.  &  E.  425.t     S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  94  ;f  but  see  5  N.  &  M.  126.f 

(/)  R.  V.  Middlesex  (J.),  5  N.  &  M.  126.t 


102  tapping's    mandamus. 

.]     Rate  Boohs,  &c. ;  Inspection,  &c. — The  Court  will,  under  cer- 


tain circumstances,  command  inspection  and  copy  of  the  rate  books  ;(A') 
but  the  Court  must  see  an  interest  and  right  before  it  will  grant  it,(/)  for 
although  the  applicants  be  not  strangers  as  to  the  documents  of  which 
they  require  inspection,  yet  they  will  not  be  entitled  to  it,  unless  some 
sufficient  reason  be  assigned  for  allowing  li.Qni) 

There  must  also  be  a  demand  previously  to  the  application  to  the 
Court.  («) 

.]     Rate  Boohs,  &c.  ;  Delivery. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  the 

delivery  over  of  all  books,  minute  books,  records,  &c. ;  and  if  there  be  just 
cause  of  detention,  it  must  appear  by  the  return. (o) 

As  to  freedom,  see  titles  Corporation  (^Municipal);  Franchise;  Free- 
dom ;  Freeman. 

Borough  Court.]      See  titles   Courts  Inferior ;   Corporation  Muni- 
cipal. 
Bowling  Green.]    See  tit.  Nuisance. 

Bridewell.]  Governor,  Rcstoratioyi. — It  has  been  granted  to  restore 
to  the  office  of  governor  of  Bridewell  in  the  City  of  London,  it  being  a 
royal  foundation. (p) 

Bridge.]     See  titles  Highway ;  Railway. 

Bridge  House  Estates.]  Clcrh,  Restoration. — It  lies  to  command 
the  corporation  of  London  to  restore  to  the  office  of  clerk  and  comptroller 
of  the  Bridge  House  Estates,  if  improperly  ousted  or  suspended  from  his 
office  it  *being  an  ancient  office  for  life,  quamdiu  se  bene  gesserit 
l-  J  in  the  disposal  of  the  Court  of  Common  Council.  The  duty 
being,  to  superintend  and  take  care  of  certain  estates  which  are  appropri- 
ted  by  the  corporation  to  the  support  and  repair  of  London  Bridge,  some 
of  the  estates  having  been  granted  to  the  corporation  for  that  express 
purpose.  (5')  But  the  writ  will  not  be  granted,  (although  the  applicant  have 
been  irregularly  suspended,)  if  it  appear  by  his  own  shewing  that  there 
was  good  ground  for  the  suspension  had  the  proceedings  been  regular.  (?•) 

(k)  See  tits.  "  Books,  Records,  &c."  "  Company,"  "County  Rate." 

[l]  R.  V.  Leicester  (J.),  4  B.  &  C.  SOLf  S.  C.  7  D.  &  R.  SVO.f  R.  v.  St.  Maryle- 
bone,  5  A.  &  E.  2t58.t  S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  GOO.f  R.  v.  Stafifordsh.  (J.),  G  A.  &  E.  85.f 
S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  CO,  277.f  This  case  further  restricts,  and,  to  some  extent,  over- 
rules R.  T.  Leicester  (J.)  R.  v.  Tower  Hamlet  (Com.)  3  G.  &  D.  94.  S.  C.  3  Q. 
B.  670.f 

{m)  R.  T.  Maidstone  (Mayor),  G  D.  &  R.  334,f  cited  in  3  G.  &  D.  94 ;  and  see  3 
Q.  B.  672.t 

(n)  R.  V.  Nottingham  (J.),  3  A.  &  E.  500.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  IGO.f  See  tit. 
"  County  Accounts."     As  to  demand  and  refusal,  see  post,  tit.  "Application." 

(o)  R.  y.  Ingram,  1  W.  Bla.  49.  See  R.  v.  Wildman,  Stra.  879.  SheriflF  of  Not- 
tingham's case,  1  Sid.  31.  R.  v.  Green,  6  A.  &  E.  548.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  63I.f  See 
tits.  "  Books,  Records,  &c.,"  "Company." 

{p)  R.  V.  Boulton,  3  Keb.  464.  See  the  exceptions  to  the  return  in  this  case. 
See  tit.  "Office." 

(5')  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  177.  R.  t.  London  Assurance  Company,  5  B. 
&  A.  900.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  See  tit.  "  Office." 

(r)  2  T.  R.  177,  suj^ra.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Chancellor),  6  T.  R.  99,  100,  where  one 


BURGESS,     ETC. 


103 


Bridgemaster's  Accounts,  Auditor  or.]    Sec  tit.  Auditor,  &c. 

Bristol.]  Steward  of  Sheriff's  Court'  of,  Admission. — It  lies  to 
command  the  corporation  of  Bristol  to  admit  to  the  office  of  Steward 
of  the  Sheriff's  Court  of  the  City  of  Bristol.(s) 

.]     Steward  of  Tolzey  Court  of  Restoration. — It  lies  to  command 

the  restoration  to  the  office  of  Steward  of  a  Court  of  Record,  as  to  the 
office  of  steward  of  the  Tolzy  Court  of  Bristol. (<) 

Building  Act.]  Where  a  party  had,  in  pursuance  of  stat.  14  Geo. 
3,  c.  78,  pulled  down  and  rebuilt  a  party  wall,  but  had  not  restored  the 
interior  decorations  of  the  adjoining  house  which  had  been  on  the  old 
wall,  it  was  held  that  a  mandamus  was  not  grantable  against  him  at  the 
instance  of  the  tenant  of  the  adjoining  house,  but  that  the  remedy  was 
by  action. (m)  As  to  commanding  justices,  to  set  out  evidence,  &c.,  on 
the  record  a  conviction,  under  stats.  14  Geo.  3,  c.  78,  and  3  Geo.  4,  c. 
23,  s.  1,  see  tit.  Conviction. 


Burgess.]     The  writ  lies  for  the  office  of  burgess.(y) 
*This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows : — 


[*54] 


Burgess. 

Capital  Burgss — Restoration 

-     56 

Election         _        .         _ 

-     54 

Removal         _         -         - 

-     56 

Application     - 

-     54 

Chief  Burgess 

Admission      -         -         - 

-     54 

Election         _        -         - 

-     56 

Swearing  in  and  admission 

-     55 

Common  Burgess. 

Enrolling  and  swearing  in 

-     55 

Restoration 

-     57 

Restoration 

-     55 

Free  Burgess. 

Returns 

-     55 

Election         -         _        . 

-     5T 

Capital  Burgess. 

Admission,  swearing  in,  &c. 

-     57 

Election          ... 

-     55 

Inn  Burgess  op  "Wigan. 

Election  and  swearing  in 

-     56 

Restoration 

-     57 

Application 

-     56 

Principal  Burgess. 

Rule 
1         FJprfinn^ Tlifl    w 

-     56 
rit,  lins 

Election         ... 
bfiftn    nftp.n    ccrn.Titnd    to    fonim 

-     57 
find    a 

municipal  corporation  to  proceed  to  the  election  of  a  burgess,(zc)  in  the 
room  of  one  deceased. (,x)  But  the  Court  will  not  fix  a  day  for  such  elec- 
tion, but  will  leave  that  to  the  proper  officer,  and  if  he  do  wrong,  the 
parties  may  then  go  to  the  Court  and  oblige  him  to  act  properly.  (?/) 

of  the  reasons  assigned  for  refusing  was,  that  the  applicant  had  another  remedy. 
And  see  R.  v.  Dr.  Gaskin,  8  T.  R.  209.  R.  v.  Whitestable  (Freefishers),  7  East,  353, 
354,  n.  («).  See  tit.  "  OflBce  "  (Restoration). 

(s)  R.  V.  Bristol  (Mayor),  1  D.  &  R.  SSO.f  See  tits.  "Courts  Inferior,"  "Manor 
Court  Leet,"  "  Office,"  "  Steward." 

(<)  R.v.  Griffiths,  5  B.  &  A.  731. 

[ii)  R.  V.  Ponsford,  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  313,  Q.  B.  See  ante,  p.  20,  and  tit.  "  Act  of 
Parliament." 

[v)  Clerk's  case,  Cro.  Jac.  506.  Stamp's  case,  Raym.  12.  R.  v.  Tidderlcy,  1  Sid. 
14.  R.  V  Wilton  (Burgesses),  5  Mod.  257.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  See  stat.  9 
Anne,  c.  20,  s.  1,  App.  See  tit.  "  Office." 

[w)  R.  V.  Bridgenorth  (Mayor),  2  Chit.  256.f  See  tits.  "Corporation,  Munici- 
pal," "  Office,"  and  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  89,  Appendix. 

(x)  R.V.Evesham  (Corp.),  Kely.  243. 

\y)  2  Chit.  256,  supra,  Stra.  948.  See  tits.  "Alderman,"  "Office." 


104  tapping's    mandamus. 

So  it  has  been  granted  to  command  a  corporation,  &c.  to  enter  an  ad- 
journment to  some  subsequent  convenient  day,  and  on  that  day  to  hold  a 
meeting  and  receive  and  examine  certain  proofs  offered  by  applicants  for 
the  office  of  burgess,  and  to  hear  and  determine  the  matter  of  such  appli- 
cations, (s) 

.J     Application — Where  the  application  is  for  a  mandamus   to 

proceed  to  the  election  of  a  burgess  in  the  room  of  one  deceased,  the  mo- 
tion is  of  course,  and  ex  dcbito  juststiac,  so  that  the  Court  cannot  nor  will 
impose  any  terms  upon  the  applicant. (a) 

].     Admission. — When  the  applicant  has  an  inchoate  right  by 

birth  or  servitude  to  be  admitted  a  burgess,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  grant 
a  mandamus  to  command  the  perfection  of  such  right ;  but  such  right 
must  clearly  appear.  Thus  where  the  inhabitant  of  a  borough  applied 
for  a  mandamus  to  the  mayor  and  and  steward  of  the  borough  to  enrol 
and  swear  him  at  a  Court  Leet  thereof  as  a  resiant  and  burgess,  but  did 
not  make  out  an  inchoate  right  in  every  inhabitant  to  be  a  burgess,  or 
that  any  such  connexion  existed  between  the  corporation  and  the  Court 
Leet  as  would  make  swearing  and  enrolment  at  the  latter,  the  means  of 
perfecting  such  right;  therefore  the  Court  refused  *the  writ.(i) 
*-  J  So  a  burgess  being  an  officer  within  the  stat.  12  Geo.  3,  c.  21, 
3.  1,  is  thereby  entitled  to  a  mandamus  for  his  admission. (o). 

.]  Swearing  in  and  Admission. — So  it  has  been  granted  to  com- 
mand the  lord  and  steward  of  a  manor  to  swear  in  and  admit  certain  bur- 
gesses presented  by  the  jury  of  the  Court  Leet.(c^) 

.]  Unrolling  and  Swearing  in. — It  lies  to  command  a  corpora- 
tion to  enrol  and  swear  in  the  prosecutor  as  a  resiant  and  burgess  at  the 
next  Court  Leet  to  be  holden  for  the  borough,  if  it  would  confer  upon  him 
a  valuable  franchise,  as  the  privilege  of  voting  at  the  election  of  Mem- 
bers of  Parliament. (e) 

.]     Restoration. — So  it  will  be  granted  on  a  proper  case  being 

shewn  to  restore  to  the  office  of  Burgess. (/) 

(z)  B.  V.  Carmarthen  (Mayor),  1  M.  &  S.  696. 

(a)  Kel.  243,  supra  R.  v.  Grampound  (Major),  6  T.  R.  302.  See  tit.  "Applica- 
tion," and  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  Appendix,  where  the  practice  is  given. 

{b)  R.  V.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  C.  G81,  G84.t  S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  181,  182.f 
S.  C.  5  D.  &  R.  590-1  R.  v.  Lord  Montacute,  1  W.  Blac.  61.  R.  v.  Physicians  (Col- 
lege), Burr.  2186.  Anon.  Lofft,  148.  R.  v.  Doncaster  (.Mayor),  V  B.  &  C.  GSO.f  S.  C. 
5  M.  &  R.  545.  R.  v.  Malmesbury  (Aldermen),  3  G.  &  D.  482.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  577.f 
S  .C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  318,  Q.  B.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (C.) 

(c)  See  stat.  App.  as  to  notice  of  application  and  costs.  R.  v.  Lord  Montacute,  1 
W.  Blac.  64.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.  Sec  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "Office." 

(d)  R.  T.  Beaufort  (Duke),  5  B.  &  Ad.  442.f  S.  C.  2  N.  &  M.  815f  where  see  form 
of  writ. 

(e)  R.  T.  West  Looe,  5  D.  &  R.  590.f  S.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  67V,f  supra.  See  tit.  "  Ale- 

(/)  R.  V.  Chalk,  Comb.  396.  R.  v.  Wilton  (Mayor,  &c.),  5  Mod.  257.  S.  C.  2  Salk. 
428.  S.  C.  1  Ld.  Raym.  225,  nom.  R.  v.  Chalke.  R.  v.  Pomfret  (Mayor),  10  Mod. 
107.  R.  V.  Truebody,  11  Mod.  75.  S.  C.  Lord  Raym.  1275.  S.  C.  Holt,  449.  R.  v. 
Shaw,  12  Mod.  113.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  93  b.  Colchester's  case,  1  Rolle,  335. 
R.  V.  Tidderley,  1  Sid.  14.  R.  v.  Halse,  1  Keb.  20,  pi.  56.  R.  t.  Phillingham,  1  Keb. 
777.  R.  v.  Allborough  (Baliffs),  1  Keb.  308.  Taylor's  case,  Poph.  133.  R.  t.  Liver- 
pool (Mayor),  Burr.  730.  R.  v.  Derby  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  436.  18. 


BURGESSES.  105 

.  Returns. — But  to  sucli  a  writ,  it  is  a  good  return,  that  the  pro- 
secutor was  de  facto  elected,  but  that  not  having  received  the  Sacrament 
according  to  stat.  13  Car.  2,  c.  2,  his  election  is  void,  for  it  is  a  precedent 
qualification. ((/)  So  it  is  a  good  return,  that  the  prosecutor  has  totally 
deserted  the  borough. (7i) 

Capital  Buegess.]  Election. — It  lies  for  a  capital  burgess.(i) 
Thus  it  lies  to  command  a  proceeding  to  the  election  of  a  capital  Bur- 
gess.(,/)  So  in  a  case  where  two  vacancies  were  occasioned  by  the  deaths 
of  two  capital  burgesses,  and  this,  though  there  was  a  quo  warranto  infor- 
mation *depending  against  the  mayor,  questioning  his  title.(/^)  ^^rr.n 
But  the  Court  will  not  fix  the  time  of  election. (Z)  *- 

.]     Election,  and  swearing  in. — It  also  lies  to  command  both  the 

election  and  swearing  in  to  such  office. (?») 

.  Ajiplication. — The  application  should  'to.  every  case  be  supported 

by  an  affidavit,  stating  the  whole  of  the  facts, (?i)  but  the  rule  is  granted 
as  of  course,  unless  some  special  reason  be  assigned  to  induce  a  refusal  of 
it.(o) 

.     Rule. — The  rule  is  absolute  in  the  first  instance. (p) 

.]     Restoration. — It  lies  to  command  restoration  to  the  office  of 

Capital  Burgess,((/)  and  a  return  to  such  a  writ,  that  he  wrote  a  libel  on 
one  of  the  aldermen,  and  that  therefore  he  consented  to  be  turned  out, 
is  bad,  for  a  common  council  cannot  try  a  libel,  and  a  resignation  by 
parol  must  be  certain. (r) 

.]     Removal. — It  does  not  lie  to  command  a  municipal  corpora- 

[g)  U.  V.  Buckingham  (Corp.)  10  Mod.  173.  R.  v.  Pomfret  (Mayor),  10  Mod.  107, 
108.  R.  v.  Aldborough  (Borough),  10  Mod.  100.   See  tit.  "Office"  (Restoration). 

[h]  R.  V.  Truebody,  11  Mod.  75  ;  Ld.  Raym.  1275.  S.  0.  Holt,  449  ;  1  Dougli.  144, 
569.  City  of  Exeter  v.  Glide,  4  Hod.  36.  S.  C.  1  Sliow.  258;  1  Show.  364.  R.  v. 
Leicester  (Mayor),  Burr,  2087,  and  Burr.  530.  See  tit.  "  Office  "  (Restoration  Re- 
turns). 

{i)  Devises'  case,  2  Keb.  725.    See  ante,  p.  53,  and  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App. 

\j)  lUchester's  case,  2  Chit.  257,t  n.  (a).  Anon.  1  Barn.  227.  R.  v.  Doncaster 
(Mayor),  1  Barn.  264.  R.  v.  Esham  (Mayor),  2  Barn.265.  R.  v. Evesham  (Borough), 
Str.  948. 

{k)  R.  V.  Grampound  (Mayor),  6  T.  R.  301.    R.  v.  Truro  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  A.  592. 

{I)  Ante,  p.  54.  Stra.  948  ;  2  Chit.  256,f  supra.  See  tit.  "  Office." 

im)  R.  V.  Truro  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  A.  590. 

\n)  1  Barn.  227,  supra.  See  tit.  "Application"  (Affidavits). 

(o)  R.  V.  Grampound  (Mayor),  6  T.  R.  303,  309. 

[p]  Anon.  1  Barn.  227.  See  tit.  "Rule." 

{q)  R.  V.  Allborough  (BalifPs),  1  Keb.  308.  S.  0.  10  Mod.  100.  R.  v.  Truebody, 
Holt,  449.  R.  V.  Gloucester  (Mayor),  Holt,  450.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug. 
79,  134,  177.  R.  V.  Grampound  (Mayor),  7  T.  R.  699.  R.  v.  Doncaster  (Mayor), 
Burr.  738.  R.  v.  Lane,  11  Mod.  270.  S.  0.  Fort.  275.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1304.  R.  v. 
Vicars,  11  Mod.  214.  R.  v.  Carlisle,  11  Mod.  378.  S.  C.  8  Mod.  19,  99.  S.  C.  Fort. 
200,  201,  204.  S.  C.  Stra.  385  ;  Ld.  Raym.  415,  1283  ;  Fitzg.  190.  Exeter  (City)  v. 
Glide,  4  Mod.  37.  Morris'  case,  7  Wm.  3,  M.  T.,  there  cited. 

(r)  11  Mod.  270.  S.  C.  Fort.  275.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1304.  As  to  what  arc  the  sub- 
jects of  return  to  such  writ,  see  11  Mod.  214,  and  11  Rep.  93,  b.,  supra.  As  to  re- 
turns of  resignation,  see  11  Mod.  270  ;  Ld.  Raym.  563.  S.  C.  Sallj.  433.  See  a  form 
of  return,  1  Doug.  177.  As  to  the  dismissal  of  a  burgess,  see  Bull.  N.  P.  204.  See 
tit.  "  Office  "  (Restoration  Returns). 


106  tapping's    mandamus. 

tion  to  assemble  themselves  together  within  their  borough,  and  consider 
the  propriety  of  removing  certain  persons  by  name  from  the  office  of 
capital  burgess  on  the  ground  of  non-residence  within  the  borough,  if 
there  be  vested  in  such  corporation,  a  discretionary  and  not  a  compulsory 
power  of  amotion,  because  in  such  a  case  the  Court  of  B.  B.  has  no  au- 
thority to  interfere  and  order  an  amotion,  unless  the  corporation  be  mis- 
governed, (.s) 

Chief  Burgess.]  Election. — It  lies  to  command  a  municipal  corpo- 
ration to  convene  a  meeting  and  elect  chief  burgesses,(;;)  and  to  such 
a  mandamus  a  return,  which  after  stating  objections  to  the  titles  of  seve- 
ral of  the  remaining  burgessess,  alleged  that  they  were  not  within  the 
borough  eight  legally  *elected  chief  burgesses,  by  whom  the  elec- 
L  J  tion  of  others  could  be  made,  and,  that,  therefore,  such  election 
could  not  be  proceeded  with,  was  held  insufficient. (?^) 

Common  Burgess].  Restoration. — It  lies  to  restore  to  the  office  of 
common  burgess. (?;) 

Free  Burgess.]  Election^  &c. — It  lies  to  command  the  Mayor,  &c., 
of  a  borough,  to  proceed  to  the  election  of  a  competent  number  of  free 
burgesses  of  the  borough,  or  to  hold  a  meeting  for  the  purpose  of  consi- 
dering the  propriety  of  proceeding  to  such  an  election. (w) 

.]  Admission  and  sioearing  in. — So  it  lies  to  command  the  ad- 
mission and  swearing  in  of  a  free  burgess  to  his  office,  if  duly  quali- 
fied, (x) 

Inn  Burgess  of  Wigan.]  Restoration. — So  it  has  been  granted  to 
command  the  inn  burgesses  of  Wigan  to  attend  a  Court  Leet,  to  make  a 
jury.(?/)  It  has  been  granted  to  restore  an  inn  burgess  of  Wigan  to  his 
office,  (s) 

Principal  Burgess.]  Election. — It  has  been  granted  to  command 
a  corporation  to  proceed  to  the  election  and  swearing  ia  of  a  principal 
burgess  in  accordance  with  a  charter,  and  of  stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  s.  2, 
although  the  day  of  election  had  elapsed. (a) 

[s]  R.  v.  West  Looe,  5  D.  &  R.  414,f  citing  and  confirming.  R.  v.  Portsmouth 
(Mayor),  4  D.  &  R.  7G7.f  And  see  5  D.  &R,  481.  See  tits.  "Alderman"  (Removal), 
"  Office  "  (Deprivation). 

[t]  R.  V.  Monmouth  (Mayor),  4  B.  &  A.  496.  See  ante,  p.  54,  and  stat.  6  &  7  Vict. 
c.  89,  App. 

(m)  4  B.  &  a.  496,  supra. 

iv)  R.  V.  Buckingham  (Mayor),  10  Mod.  173.  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration).  • 

\io)  R.  V.  Fowey  (Mayor),  2  B.  &  C.  587.t  See  ante,  p.  54,  and  stat.  6  &  7  Vict. 
c.  89,  App. 

(a;)  R.  V.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  5  M.  k  R.  545.  S.  C.  7  B.  &  C.  630.f  R.  v.  West 
Looe  (Mayor),  2  D.  &  R.  178-1  S.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  681.f    See  tit.  "  Office"  (Admission). 

(7/)  Rector  of  Wigan's  case,  Stra.  1207.  S.  C.  Wils.  76.  And  see  1  W.  Blac.  64, 
n.  {l\.  See  tit.  "  Jury."  {z)  R.  v.  Holmes,  Burr.  1641. 

(a)  See  stat.  App.  R.  v.  Thetford  (Mayor),  8  East,  270.  Scarborough's  case,  Stra. 
1180.  R.  V.  Woodrow,  2  T.  R.  732;  1  Roll.  Abr.  513,  514.  See  ante,  p.  54,  and  stat. 
6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App. 


BURGESSES.  107 

BuEaESS  Koll].     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


BuEGESS  Roll. 

Insertion  of  Name  -  -  57 

Inspection,  &c.         -  -  -  58 

Restoration  of  name  -  -  58 

Application     -  -  -  58 


Bdrgess  Roll — Writ  -  -  -  59 

Return  -  -  -  59 

Costs      -  -  -  -  59 

Assessors       -  -  -  -  59 

Election  -  -  -  59 


.]     Insertion  of  Name. — It  lies  to  command  the  insertion  of  a 

name  in  the  burgess  roll  of  a  borough(&)  under  stat.  1  Vict.  c.  78, 
although  no  burgess  *list,  or  an  imperfect  one  has  been  made  ^fQ-, 
out.(c)  Thus  where  the  overseers  of  one  of  several  parishes  in  a  L  J 
borough  omitted  to  make  out  the  burgess  list  required  by  stat.  5  &  6 
Wm.  4,  c.  7G,  s.  15,  so  that  at  the  revision  Court  of  the  mayor,  there 
was  no  list  in  which  the  name  of  the  claimant  for  the  parish  could  be 
inserted.  It  was  held,  that  this  intermediate  defect  in  his  title  to  be  on 
the  general  burgess  roll,  which  is  made  up  of  the  several  parish  lists,  did 
not  preclude  the  Court  from  issuing  a  mandamus,  to  command  the  inser- 
tion of  his  name  under  1  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  24,  for  the  statute  gives  jurisdic- 
tion as  well  where  the  claim  of  a  party  has  been  rejected  as  where  his 
name  has  been  expunged. (fZ) 

And  the  Court  will  make  absolute  a  rule  for  a  mandamus  for  such 
purpose,  although  the  year  for  which  such  burgess  roll  was  made  out, 
have  expired  since  the  granting  of  the  rule  nisi,  and  the  mayor  be  dead 
to  whom  the  rule  was  directed,  and  notwithstanding,  no  application  has 
been  made  to  the  present  mayor,  (e) 

.]     Inspection. — The  writ  lies  to  allow  the  burgess  to  inspect  the 

voting  papers  deposited  with  a  town  clerk,  and  to  compare  his  own  with 
those  produced,  and  to  take  copies,  and  make  corrections.  (/) 

.]  Restoration  of  Name. — The  Court  will  not  grant  a  manda- 
mus under  stat.  7  Wm.  4  and  1  Vict.  c.  78,  c.  24,  to  reinstate  a  name 
which  has  been  expunged  from  the  burgess  roll,  unless  the  applicant 
prove  his  title,  although  his  name  may  have  been  expunged  upon  an  in- 
valid notice  of  objection,  for  the  Court  is  bound  by  such  statute  to  in- 
quire into  the  title. (^) 

[b)  See  stat.  App.  R.  v.  Hythe  (Mayor),  5  A.  &.  E.  832.1  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  239.f 
R.  V.  Harwich  (Mayor),  1  P.  &  D.  134.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  919.f  R.  v.  Bridgenorth 
(Mayor),  2  P.  &  D.  317.  S.  C.  10  A.  &.  E.  66.f  R.  v.  Eye  (Mayor),  2  P.  &  D.  348. 
S.  C.  9  A.  &  E.  670,f  where  see  the  direction  of  writ.  R.  v.  Litchfield  (Mayor),  1 
G.  &  D.  28.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  453.f  S.  0.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  122,  Q.  B.  And  see  2  Q.  B. 
693.f  S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  10.  R.  v.  New  Windsor  (Jlayor),  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  337,  Q.  B. 
S.  C.  7  Q.  B.  908.f  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  319,  Q.  B.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  See 
Townsend's  case,  1  Lev.  91.  R.  v.  Dover  (Mayor),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  97,  M.  C,  where 
see  form  of  writ. 

(c)  1  G.  &  D.  28.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  453.f  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  122,  Q.  B.  And  see  R. 
V.  Dovor  (Mayor),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  101,  M.  C. 

{d)  R.  V.  Liclifield  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  28.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  453.f  S.  C.  5  Jur.  889. 
S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.   S.  122,  Q.  B. 

(e)  R.  V.  Eye  (Mayor),  2  P.  &  D.  348.  S.  C.  9  A.  &  E.  670.f 

(/)  R.  V.  Arnold,  4  A.  &  E.  657.f     The  rule  is  not  absolute  in  the  first  instance. 

((/)  R.  V.  Harwich  (Mayor),  1  P.  &  D.  134.     S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  919,t  1  G.  &  D.  28. 


108  tapping's    mandamus. 

So,  •where  the  name  of  certain  burgesses  duly  qualified  in  other  re- 
spects were  objected  to,  and  expunged  from  the  burgess  lists  on  revision, 
on  account  of  non-payment  of  the  shilling  required  by  stat.  2  Wm.  4,  c. 
44,  s.  56,  and  in  the  succeeding  mayoralty,  before  fresh  assessors  were 
elected,  application  was  made  for  a  mandamus  to  restore  the  name,  on  a 
suggestion  that  the  objection  was  invalid,  it  was  held,  (before  stat.  7  Wm. 
4  and  3  Vict.  c.  78,)  that  the  Court  had  no  power  to  grant  the  writ  in 
such  a  case. (7t) 

.  Application. — The  application  for  the  writ  must  be  made  be- 
fore the  end  of  the  term  following  the  rejection  or  expunging  of  the 
name;(/)  as  it  would  seem  that  the  statutes  regulating  this  subject,  con- 
r*'^Qi  ^^^^P^^**^'^  ^  *speedy  remedy,  and  to  impose  on  the  Court  the  duty 
L       J  of  inquiry  into  the  prosecutor's  title  by  affidavit,  (j) 

.  TTr<7. — The  writ  is  not  in  any  case  peremptory  in  the  first  in- 
stance. (Z;) 

.     Return. — When  the  writ  is  not  to  receive  a  claim  for  insertion, 

but  to  restore  a  name  improperly  expunged,  the  return  must  state  the 
grounds  of  disqualification,  with  certainty  and  particularity,  so,  that  if 
the  disqualification  be  the  non-payment  of  rates,  the  return  must  set  forth 
the  times  when  they  were  made,  and  how  the  prosecutor  was  assessed  to 
and  became  liable  to  pay  them.(^ 

.      Costs. — The  Court  has  refused  to  a  ward  costs  against  a  mayor 

in  an  application  to  insert  a  name  in  a  burgess  list,  where  it  did  not  ap- 
pear that  the  mayor  had  acted  improperly. (?n) 

Assessors].  Election. — It  lies  to  command  the  election  of  assessors 
to  assist  in  the  revision  of  the  burgess  lists,  pursuant  to  stat.  7  Wm.  4 
and  1  Vict.  c.  78. (?i) 

Burial.]  It  lies  to  command  the  rector,  officiating  curate,  church- 
wardens and  sexton  of  a  parish  to  do  every  act  necessary  to  be  done  in 
order  to  due  burial  in  the  churchyard,  or  other  usual  burial  ground  of  the 
parish  of  the  corpse  of  the  late  parishioner,  because  burial  in  the  parish 
churchyard  in  the  prescribed  mode,  which  usage  and  custom  has  sanc- 
tioned, is  a  common  law  right  inherent  in  the  parishioners,  and  by  award- 

S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  45.3,f  supra.  And  see  stat.  '7  Wm.  4  and  1  Yict.  c.  "78,  s.  24.  App.,  as 
to  time  within  which  the  application  is  to  be  made,  and  as  to  costs  of  application. 

(h)  5  A.  &  E.  832.1  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  239,t  supra.  See  ante,  p.  10. 

[i)  Stat.  1  Vict.  c.  78.  s.  24,  App.  See  tit.  "Application"  (when  made). 

(./)  R.  V.  Dovor  (Major),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  101,  M.  C.  R.  v.  Eye  (Mayor),  9  A.  & 
E.  CTO.f     S.  0.  8  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  Q.  B.  142. 

{k)  9  A.  &  E.  eVO,  675,  677,  679-1  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  348,  supra;  1  G.  &  D.  28. 
S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  453,f  supra.  See  stat.  1  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  24.  See  tit.  '•'  Peremptory 
Mandamus." 

{I)  R.  V.  Dovor  (Mayor),  IG  L.  J.,  N.  S.  97,  M.  C.  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration 
Return). 

(m)  R.  V.  Lichfield  (Mayor),  6  Jur.  624.     See  tit.  "  Costs." 

[n)  R.  T.  Weymouth  (Mayor),  7  Q.  B.  46.1  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  333,  Q.  B.  See 
Btat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App. 


CANAL     COMPANY.  109 

ing  the  writ  in  this  case  the  Court  of  B.  R.  acts  in  aid  of  the  Ecclesias- 
tical Court,  for  that  Court  would  compel  the  burial  but  not  in  so  speedy  a 
manner  as  by  mandamus. (o) 

But  the  mode  of  burial  being  purely  of  Ecclesiastical  cognizance,  this 
Court  will  refuse  a  mandamus  to  inter  the  body  of  a  parishioner  in  a  par- 
ticular and  unusual  manner,  as  in  an  iron  coffin. (^9) 

So,  it  does  not  lie  to  command  the  burial  of  the  corpse  of  a  parish- 
ioner in  *a  vault,  or  in  any  particular  part  of  a  churchyard,  as  the  ^.^pr.-. 
rector  has  a  right  to  exercise  his  discretion  as  as  to  place. (j)  L       J 

Neither  does  it  lie  to  command  the  overseers  of  the  poor  of  a  parish  to 
remove  from  an  hospital  within  the  parish,  and  cause  to  be  interred  the 
body  of  a  deceased  pauper,  because  they  are  not  bound  either  by  common 
law,  or  by  stat.  43  Eliz.  c.  2,  to  bury  a  pauper  settled  in  the  parish,  and 
who  dies  there,  unless  such  pauper,  die  in  a  parish  house,  (r) 

As  to  detention  of  corpse,  see  tit.  Corpse. 

Butchers'  Company.]  Clerk,  Restoration. — It  does  not  lie  to  re- 
store to  the  office  of  clerk  of  the  Butcher's  Company  in  London. (s)  The 
Court  in  its  judgment  said,  that  if  it  be  an  office  of  freehold,  an  assize 
may  be  had,  or  an  action  on  the  case,  and  if  it  be  not  an  office  of  free- 
hold, then  it  is  private  service,  which  does  not  concern  the  public.  (?) 

Bye-laws.]     See  tit.  Corporatio7i  Municipal. 

Calls.]     See  tit.  Company. 

Canal  Company.]  Didies,  &c. — ^The  writ  will  be  granted  to  com- 
mand a  canal  company  to  enrol  according  to  its  act  of  Parliament,  all 
contracts,  agreements,  sales,  conveyances,  and  assurances,  relating  to 
certain  purchased  land ;  and  after  a  lapse  of  sixty-five  years  from  the 
time  of  such  purchase,  during  which  time  no  application  has  been  made 
to  the  company,  the  Court  will  refuse  to  grant  such  a  mandamus  on  the 
refusal  of  the  company,  so  to  enrol,  &c.(w)     So  it  will  be  granted  to  com- 

(0)  R.  T.  Coleridge,  1  Chit.  BSS.f  S.  C.  2  B.  &  A.  806,  808,t  per  Abbott,  C.  J. 
Ex  parte  Blackmoor,  1  B.  &  Ad.  122.f  R.  v.  Stewart  and  Another,  4  P.  &  D.  349. 
Anon.  3  A.  &  E.  552. f  See  Andrews  v.  Cawthorne,  Willes,  536.  Degge's  Parson's 
Law,  pt.  1,  c.  12.  Burn's  Eccl.  L.,  tit.  "  Burial,"  258.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Cemetery," 
(B.)  Dean,  &c.,  of  Exeter's  case,  1  Salk.  334.  And  see  R.  v.  Exeter  (Ep.),  Palm. 
51.     The  Complete  Incumbent,  381,  ed.  ITQS.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (C.  2). 

(jo)  See  note  (0),  supra,  ante,  p.  22.  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  11.  R.v.Thet- 
ford  (Churchwardens),  5  T.  R.  364.  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbishop),  8  East,  212, 
219.     See  tit.  "  Charch-rate."  (g)  Ex  parte  Blackmoor,  1  B.  &  Ad.  122.f 

(r)  R.  V.  Stewart,  4  P.  &  D.  349.  S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  40,  M.  C.  Anon.  3  A.  & 
E.  552.t 

(.s)  R.  V.  White,  3  Salk.  232.  S.  C.  6  Mod.  18,  also  cited  in  R.  v.London  (Mayor), 
2  T.  R.  182,  n.  (6).     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (C.)     See  tit.  "  Poor." 

(<)  But  see  tit.  "  Masons'  Company,"  &c.  R.  v.  White,  Ld.  Raym.  1004,  where 
it  says  the  mandamus  was  granted,  the  Court  saying  it  was  the  same  as  a  town 
clerk.     See  tits.  "  Company"  (Clerk  of  Private),  "  Ofiice." 

(m)  R.  t.  Leeds  Canal,  3  P.  &  D.  174.  S.  C.  11  A.  &  E.  SlG.f  See  tit.  "Act  of 
Parliament,"  "  Application." 


110  tapping's   mandamus. 

ruand  a  company  to  maintain  and  repair  certain  parts  of  the  banks  of 
their  canal,(i')  and  this  although  there  may  be  another  remedy  by  indict- 
ment ;  for  if  such  breach  of  contract  also  cause  a  public  nuisance  that 
fact  cannot  dispense  with  the  necessity  of  a  specific  performance  of  the 
obligation  contracted  by  them  on  obtaining  their  act.(?f) 

.]      Cumjicnsatlon.     See  tit.  Comi^tnsation^  {^(Jom][)any?) 

.]     Tolls. — It  also  lies  to  command  such  a  company  to  establish 

an  uniform  rate  of  tolls  along  the  whole  line  of  their  canal,  &c.(x). 

r*m  *Canon].  Admuuon,  &c. — It  lies  to  admit  to  a  canonry  or 
'-  -I  prebend,  and  to  institute,  induct  and  invest  therein. (y)  But 
it  does  not  lie  to  command  the  admission  of  a  canon  to  his  stall,  on  a 
custom  to  choose  a  supernumerary,  when  all  the  stalls  are  full,  until  a 
vacany  should  happen,  (s)  the  mandamus  being  refused,  because  the  Court 
held  such  custom  to  be  ridiculous  and  void. 

.]     Restoration. — It  lies  not  to  command  a  visitor  to  restore  a 

canon  whom  he  has  deprived,  for  a  visitor  has  an  absolute  power  within 
his  jurisdiction. (a) 

Canons,  Residentiary].  Election. — It  lies  to  command  the  filling 
up  a  vacancy  among  the  canons  residentiary  in  proper  time,  and  on  such 
a  mandamus  the  Court  will  compel  an  election  at  the  peril  of  those  who 
resist. (i)  But  there  must  not  exist  a  remedy  in  the  Spiritual  or  other 
Courts,  or  one  by  quare  impedit.(c) 

.]     Elecion  as  Dean. — It  lies  also  to  command  the  proceeding  to 

the  election  and  admission  of  one  to  be  dean,  and,  if  necessary,  to  elect, 
collate  and  admit  him  to  be  a  canon  residentiary. (tZ) 

Canterbury — Court  of  the  City  of.]  See  iii\QS  Attorney ;  Courts 
Inferior. 

Capital  Burgess].     See  tit.  Burgess  ( Ca-pital). 

{v)  R.  V.  Bristol  Dock,  2  Q.  B.  64.f  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  286.  R.  v.  Bristol  Dock,  6 
B.  &  C.  ISl.f  S.  C.  9  D.  &  R.  309.t  R.  v.  Severn  Railway,  2  B.  &  A.  646,t  and 
see  R.  v.  Manchester  Railway,  3  G.  &  D.  269.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  528.f  See  tit.  "Rail- 
way." 

(w)  2  Q.  B.  64.f  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  286.  See  ante,  p.  24,  and  tit.  "Act  of  Parlia- 
ment." 

(x)  Clarke  v.  Leicestershire  Canal,  6  Q.  B.  899,f  and  see  tit.  "  Tolls." 

[y)  Clarke  v.  Sarum  (Ep.),  Stra.  1081.  S.  C.  Andr.  20. 185.  See  tit.  "Preben- 
dary, Coxe's  case,  E.  T.  1659,  cited  in  R.  v.  Stenhowe,  2  Show.  199. 

(2)  R.  V.  Stenhowe,  2  Show.  199.     S.  C.  Skin.  45.     S.  C.  Sir  T.  Jon.  199. 

(a)  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  296.  S.  C.  1  "W.  Bla.  21.  Broadoaks  or  Bride- 
oak's  case,  H.,  12  Anne,  there  cited,  per  Wright,  J.  Philips  and  Bury,  Ld.  Raym. 
5.     S.C.  2  T.  R.  346.     S.  C.  Skin.  447,  475.     Show.  P.  C.  35.     See  tit.  "Visitor." 

(b)  Chichester  (Ep.)  v.  Harwood,  1  T.  R.  652,  per  BuUer,  J.,  also  cited  in  R.  v. 
Stenhowe,  2  Show.  200,  n.  (a),  3rd  ed.  Chichester's  case,  Loflft,  253.  See  tit. 
"  Prebendary." 

(c)  See  ante,  p.  22,  26.  R.  v.  St.  Peter's,  Exeter,  12  A.  &  E.  525.f  S.  C.  9  L, 
J.,  N.  S.  308,  Q.  B. 

(d)  R.  V.  St.  Peter's  Exeter,  12  A.  &  E.  512.+  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  253.  See  tit. 
"  Dean." 


CERTIORARI,     ETC.  Ill 

Capital  Citizens.]    See  tit.  Citizen  (^Capital.) 

Carriers.]  Appeal. — It  lies  to  command  justices  at  quarter  sessions 
to  enter  continuances  and  hear  an  appeal  against  a  conviction  under  stat. 
50  Geo.  3,  c.  48,  s.  4,  for  carrying  more  luggage  than  allowed  by  the 
act.(c) 

As  to  the  carriage  of  goods,  see  tit.  Railway  (  Goods.) 

Cathedral  Stall.]  Admission. — It  lies  to  command  an  admission 
to  a  cathedral  stall,  and  to  a  voice  in  the  chapter.  (/) 

*Case.  See  titles  Quarter  jSessions  (Case);  Poor  (^Casc),  and  p^p,-)-, 
ante,  p.  21. 

Certificate.]  Where  a  power  is  delegated  to  grant  a  certificate,  the 
Court  will  by  mandamus,  enforce  the  due  granting  thereof.  (^) 

Certiorari.]  Where  a  statute  does  not  allow  a  removal  of  proceed- 
ings by  certiorari,  the  Court  will  not,  by  means  of  a  mandamus  to  justi- 
ces, &c.,  commanding  them  to  hear,  &c.,  bring  them  under  review,. (A) 

But  it  would  seem  that  it  will  be  granted  to  command  justices,  &c.,  to 
amend  their  return  to  a  certiorari,  by  commanding  them  to  return  the 
information  on  which  a  conviction  is  founded,  and  also  to  set  forth  on  the 
face  of  the  conviction,  the  evidence  given  touching  the  entry  in  the  con- 
viction mentioned ;  but  in  such  a  case  there  must  be  proof  that  evidence 
was  in  fact  taken,  but  that  it  has  been  set  out  in  the  words  used  by  the 
witnesses,  (t) 

Chamberlain.]  The  writ  of  mandamus  lies  for  the  ofl&ce  of  cham- 
berlain(y). 

.]  Election. — Thus  it  will  be  granted  to  command  the  proceed- 
ing to  an  election  of  chamberlain  under  stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  s.  2.(/i) 

.]     Admission. — It  also  will  be  granted  to  command  the  bailiffs 

or  other  proper  officers  of  a  corporation  to  admit  to  the  office  of  chamber- 
lain, (Z) 

[e)  R.  V.  Essex  (J.),  4  B.  &  A.  276.     See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions,"  (Appeal). 

(/)  R.  V.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  536.  S.  0.  1  P.  Wms.  348,  cited  in  R.  v.  London 
(Ep.),  1  Wils.  13.     See  tits.  "Dean,"  "  Prebendary." 

\g)  R.  V.  Canterbury,  (Mayor),  M.,  1  Geo.  1  cited  in  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils. 
13.  S.  C.  Stra.  1192.  But  see  R.  v.  Divisional  Justices,  1  Al.  &  Nap.  See  tits. 
"Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Ship,"  (Certificate,  &c.) 

(/i)  Ex  parte  Pratt,  2  N.  &  P.  102.  R.  v.  West  R.  (J.),  1  A.  &  E.  563.f  S.  C.  3 
N.  &  M.  802,f  cited  in  R.  v.  Sheffield  Railway,  1 1  A.  &  E.  lOCf  and  in  R.  v.  Chelten- 
ham Commissioners,  1  Q.  B.  471.1     See  tits.  "Game  Laws,"  "  Quarter  Sessions." 

{i )  R.  V.  Wilson,  3  N.  &  M.  753.f  In  re  Rix,  4  D.  &  R.  352.1  R.  v.  Wamford, 
5  D.  &  R.  489,f  also  cited  in  3  N.  &  M.  756.t     See  tit.  "  Conviction." 

(y)  Scarborough's  case,  Stra,  1180,  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  See  tit. 
"  Office." 

ik)  Note  (y),  and  post,  tit.  "Office"  (Election),  and  stat.  6  &  7  Vict,  89,  App. 

\l)   R,  V,  Bridgnoth  (Bailiffs),  1  Barn.  53. 


112  tapping's   mandamus. 

As  to  the  office  of  auditor  of  cbamberlain's  accounts,  see  tit.  Auditor^ 
&c. 

Chancery,  Inn  of.]     See  tit.  Inn  of  Chancery. 

Chapel.]  Enrolment. — The  writ  will  be  granted  to  command  the 
enrolment  of  a  chapel  under  the  act  for  liberty  of  conscience. (m) 

Chapelwardens.]  Swearing  in. — It  lies  to  command  the  swearing 
in  of  chapelwardens  by  administering  to  them  the  declaration  required  by 
Stat.  5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  62,  s.  9,  and  the  rule  (in  analogy  with  the  case  of 
churchwardens)  was  made  absolute  in  the  first  instance,  although  other 
persons  also  claimed  to  have  been  duly  elected. (n) 

*Chaplain.]  Appointment. — It  lies  to  nominate  and  appoint 
'■  J  a  chaplain  to  perform  divine  service  where  the  office  is  a  free- 
hold, with  a  permanent  fund  for  payment  ;(o)  and  the  Court  will  grant 
the  writ  even  when  it  is  not  clear  that  the  cure  is  not  already  full.(p) 
It  lies  also  to  command  the  guardians  of  an  union  to  appoint  a  chaplain 
pursuant  to  an  order  of  the  poor  law  commissioners,  such  chaplain  being 
an  officer  within  the  meaning  of  the  stat.  4  &  5  Wm.  4,  c.  76,  s.  46,  in- 
terpreted by  sect.  109.(2)  ^°  ^^  ^^^^  *^  command  the  appointment  of  a 
chaplain,  pursuant  to  the  terms  of  a  charter.  (/•) 

.]  Admission. — It  lies  also  to  command  the  admission  of  a  chap- 
lain, (s)  And  it  lies  generally  to  admit  a  chaplain  where  there  is  no  vis- 
itor, or  no  visitatorial  power  in  being,  as  were  the  visitatorial  power  is 
suspended  by  the  union  of  the  office  of  visitor  with  that  to  which  the 
mandamus  is  to  be  directed.  (<) 

.]     To  perform  Duties,  &c. — It  also  lies  to  command  justices  to 

permit  the  chaplain  of  a  county  lunatic  asylum  to  perform  the  duties  of 
his  office.  But  not  if  he  have  been  subsequently  dismissed  by  such  jus- 
tices, inasmuch  as  by  stat.  9  Geo.  4,  c.  40,  ss.  30,  32,  they  have  the  dis- 
cretionary power  of  appointing  and  dismissing  such  chaplain. (i<) 

(m)  R.  V.  Green,  Skin.  670.     See  tit.  "  Dissenters." 

[n)  Ex  parte,  Duffield,  &c.,  G  N.  &  M.  865.f  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  6l7,t  citing  R.  t. 
Middlesex  (Archdeacon),  3  A.  &  E.  615.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  494.f  Ex  parte  Pen- 
ruddock,  1  H.  &  W.  347.     See  tit.  "Churchwardens." 

(o)  R.  T.  Davie  and  Others,  6  A,  &  E.  374.-J-  See  tit.  "Parson."  As  to  chaplain 
of  College,  see  tit.  "College"  (Chaplain). 

{p)  Note  (o). 

(g')  4  P.  &  D.  593.f  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  130,f  supra.  R.  v.  Poor  Law  Commissioners, 
9  A.  &  E.  911, f  there  cited  and  distinguished. 

(r)  R.  V.  Saudford  (Governors),  1  N.  &  P.  328-t  S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  177.  R.  v. 
Braintree  Union,  4  P.  &  D.  593.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  130.f  See  tit.  "  Charter,"  and 
ante,  p.  11. 

(«)  R.  T.  Baker,  Burr.  1267.  Per  Mansfield,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  Stra.  797. 
See  tit.  "  Office"  (Admission). 

{t)  Stra.  797.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  52,  supra.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man/'  (A.)  See  also 
Andrews,  181,  and  stat.  2  Geo.  2,  c.  29.     See  tit.  "Visitor." 

(m)  R.  t.  Middlesex  Lunatic  Asylum  (V.  J.),  2  G.  &  D.  300.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  433.t 
S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  30,  M.  C. 


C  n  AR  TE  RS,     ETC.  113 

].     License. — It  also  lies  to  command  a  bishop  or  other  officer  to 

license  one  to  be  the  chaplain  of  a  gaol,  if  a  proper  and   fit  person  to  be 
Buch  chaplain,  and  he  have  been  refused  without  cause. (v) 

Charity].  It  lies  in  some  cases  to  enforce  a  legal  right  under  a  pri- 
vate institution,  as  a  charity, (w)  as  to  command  a  visitor  to  hear  an  ap- 
peal.(x)  But  where  the  right  is  equitable  merely,  the  Court  of  B.  K. 
will  not  interfere  by  mandamus.  Thus  the  Court  refused  to  command 
the  trustees  of  the  Itugby  charity  to  pay  increased  alms  of  the  claim- 
ants on  the  funds,  *although  the  applicants  were  at  an  advanced 
age,  and  would  probably  be  dead  before  relief  could  be  had  in  '-  J 
Chancery. (y) 

So  it  lies  to  command  the  delivery  to  churchwardens,  or  one  of  them, 
of  a  key  of  the  coffer  or  chest  containing  the  writings,  accounts,  and 
moneys  of  and  relating  to  a  private  charity,  but  the  legal  right  of  the 
churchwardens  to  the  same  must  be  made  out.(,~)  Thus  where  in  pursu- 
ance of  the  will  of  a  private  person,  his  executor  by  deed,  conveyed  land 
to  trustees  for  the  benefit  of  the  poor  of  a  parish,  the  deed  provided  that 
a  chest  to  which  there  should  be  attached  three  locks  and  three  keys, 
should  remain  in  the  parish  church  for  keeping  all  writings,  accounts, 
&c.,  and  the  trust  moneys  remaining  unexpended ;  that  one  of  such  keys 
should  be  kept  by  the  receiver,  the  second  by  the  parson,  and  the  third 
by  the  churchwardens.  It  was  held  that  a  mandamus  lay  to  the  trustees 
to  command  the  delivery  of  one  key  to  one  of  the  churchwardens  although 
the  application  concerned  the  trust  of  a  charity  which  was  but  a  private 
endowment ;  the  claim  of  the  churchwardens,  however,  being  not  merely 
equitable  but  legal. 

Charters.]  This  writ  is  the  proper  remedy  to  enforce  obedience  to 
the  Queen's  charters,  and,  in  such  cases,  is  demandable  ex  debito  jus- 
titiae,(a)  but  not  to  supply  a  casus  omissus  from  such  charter.(i) 

As  to  chartered  companies,  see  titles  Amicable  Assurance  Cov}pany ; 
Company. 

Charter  House  School.]     Restoration  of  ScJwlar. — It  lies  not  to 

(v)  R.  V.  Bath  (Ep.),  1  D.  &  M.  US.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  Ul.f  S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
324,  Q.  B.  See  tit.  "  Lectureship."  R.  v.  Blooer,  Burr.  1045.  Lord  Raym.  1205, 
1206.     R.  V.  Exeter  (Ep.),  2  East,  462.     R.  v.  Oxford  (Ep.),  1  East,  345. 

(w)  R.  V.  Ottery  St.  Mary,  3  G.  &  D.  382.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  IST.f  S.  C.  12  L  J., 
N.  S.,  118  Q.  B.  Ex  parte  Rugby  Charity,  9  D.  &  R.  214.f  See  tit.  "  Institutions" 
(Private). 

(x)  R.  V.  Worcester  (Ep.),  4  M.  &  S.  415.     See  tit.  "Blue  Coat  School." 

( »/)  Ante,  p.  27.     Ex  parte  Rugby  Charity,  9  D.  &  R.  214.t 

(z)  3  G.  &  D.  382.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  157. f  S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  118,  Q.  B.  Sec  til. 
"Church"  (Keys). 

(a)  Ante,  p.  11,  BuU.  N.  P.  199.  Cas.  temp.  Hard.  99;  Burr.  2189;  8  East.  270; 
Bac.  Ahr.  tit.  "Mandamus,"  257.     See  tits.  "Acts  of  Parliament,"  "Chaplain." 

(6)  Ante,  p.  31.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  99.  R.  v.  Arnauld,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  50,  Q. 
B. 

April,  1852.— 8 


114  tapping's   mandamus, 

restore  a  boy  to  tLc  Charter  House,  lie  being  but  an  almsman,  and  under 
the  jurisdiction  of  a  visitor. (c) 

Chester — Court  of  County  Palatine  of.] — See  tits.  Attorney; 
'Cou7-t)i'  Inferior. 

Chief  Burgess.]     See  tit.  Burgess  (^Chief). 

Chrism.]  The  Court  has  by  mandamus,  commanded  a  bishop  to  give 
the  chrism,  i.  e.  oil,  with  which  to  baptize  the  parishioners'  children,  al- 
though the  archbishop  might  have  been  appealed  to. (J) 

[*65  ]     *CnuRCH.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


Church. 

C 

tiDRCH — Rates  in  nature  of  Ch 

irch- 

Keys               -        -        ■ 

-      65 

rate     -        -        - 

-     66 

Burial    -         -         - 

-     65 

Returns 

-     67 

Church  Trustees     - 

-     65 

Recovery  of  rate     - 

-     67 

Duty,  &c. 

-     65 

Loans    -         -         -         - 

-     67 

Church-rate 

-     65 

Rates  for  payment 

-     67 

Making  - 

1        JiTri/i}         \   Tnnn 

-     65 

in 

Returns 
pnmTYiand  tbfi  dfilivprv  of  f' 

-     68 
ifi  Tcfivs 

of  a  church. (e) 

As  to  burial  in  a  church,  &c.,  see  tit.  Burial. 

.]      Clinrch   Trustees,  Duty,  &c. — It   lies   to  command   trustees 

under  certain  acts  of  Parliament  for  building  a  church,  &c.,  to  attend,  in 
pursuance  of  the  act,  a  meeting  of  the  auditors  of  accounts  of  the  parish, 
and  bring  with  them,  and  produce  at  such  a  meeting,  the  book  or  books 
containing  an  account  of  all  moneys  received,  and  of  all  moneys  paid  dur- 
ing the  last  half-year.(/) 

.]      Church-Rate,  making. — The  writ  will  not,  at  common  law,  be 

granted  to  command  the  making,  by  churchwardens,  of  a  church-rate,  not 
only  because  it  is  a  subject  purely  of  ecclesiastical  cognizance,  but  also 
because  all  that  can  be  legally  required  of  them  is  that  they  shall  call  a 
meeting  of  the  parishioners,  for  the  purpose  of  considering  the  propriety 
of  making  a  rate ;  for  they  have  not  a  legal  capacity  to  make  a  rate  with- 
out the  sanction  of  the  vestry. (^)     The  Court  will,  however,  grant  it  to 

(c)  R.  V.  Wheeler,  3  Keb.  3G0.  See  tits.  "  Blue  Coat  School,"  "  Charity,"  "  Col- 
lege." 

{d)  R.  V.  Exeter,  (Ep.),  Palm.  51,  temp.  26  Edw.  3,  where  see  form  of  "Writ,  cited 
in  R.  V.  Coleridge,  2  B.  &  A.  807  ;f  and  in  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  165,  per  Moreton, 
..(.;  and  in  Mr.  Amherst's  case  of  Gray's  Inn.  1  Vent.  187,  cited  in  R.  v.  Dublin 
(Dean),  8  Mod.  28.  See  tits.  "  Bishop,"  "  Confirmation,"  "  Sacrament."  See  ante, 
p.  21. 

(e)  Anon.,  2  Chit.  255.f  The  Court  advised  a  new  key  to  be  got,  but  at  the 
time  said  that  if  the  granting  the  writ  would  prevent  a  breach  of  the  peace,  it 
should  be  granted.     See  tits.  "Charity,"  "  Corporation,  Municipal"  (Insignia,  &c.) 

(/)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  5  N.  &  M.  222.t  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  SSo.f  See  also  6  A.  & 
B.  BU.f     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  507.t     See  tits.  '•  Corporation,  Municipal"  (Duties,  &c.) 

{g)  R.  V.  Thetford,  5  T.  R.  364  (1  Vent.  307  :  1  Mod.  79,  i04,  and  cases  there 


CHURCH.  115 

command  chuircliwardens  of  a  parish,  or  of  two  united  parishes,  to  assemble 
;i  meeting  pursuant  to  a  stat.  as  the  10th  Ann.  c.  11,  for  the  purpose  of 
ascertaining  and  agreeing  as  to  the  moneys  and  rates  to  be  assessed  for 
the  repair  of  the  church,  &c.(A) 

It  has  also  been  decided  that  the  Court  will,  by  mandamus,  command 
the  chapelwardens  of  a  parish  to  assess  a  rate  for  the  purpose  of  levying 
the  proportion  of  a  church-rate,  by  custom,  payable  by  the  inhabitants  of 
the  chapelry.(t)  But  where  the  majority  at  a  vestry  meeting  held  in  pur- 
suance *of  a  monition  from  the  Consistory  Court  to  take  steps  for  ^  ^^^  -, 
repairing  a  church,  refused  to  make  any  church-rate,  and  there- 
upon  the  churchwardens  and  the  minority  made  a  rate,  the  Court  refused 
u  mandamus  to  the  chapelwardens  of  a  township  in  the  parish  to  compel 
them  to  raise  their  customary  proportion  of  the  rate  so  made.(j)  So  where 
a  township  being  part  of  a  parish  is  called  upon  by  mandamus  to  pay  a 
definite  customary  proportion  of  a  church-rate  laid  for  the  whole  parish,  it 
must  appear  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  township  were  summoned  to  con- 
sider the  rate,  for  if  the  custom  require  such  summons,  fulfilment  of  that 
requisite  is  essential,  and,  if  it  do  not,  it  is  a  bad  custom. (/t-) 

• .]     Rate,  in  the  nature  of  a  Church-rate. — The  writ,  however,  lie.s 

to  command  the  laying  and  raising  of  a  rate  in  the  nature  of  a  church- 
rate,  when  authorized  and  required  by  statute,  &c.  Thus  in  a  case  in 
which  James  1,  had  granted  a  rectory  to  a  corporation  in  trust  for  a  parish, 
and  to  pay  certain  stipends,  and  bear  all  charges  issuing  out  of  such  rec- 
tory, and  afterwards  the  stat.  22  &  23  Car.  2,  absolved  the  parishioners 
from  the  payment  of  tithes,  and  enacted  that  a  rate  should  be  made  yearly 
by  the  parish  officers  for  the  payment  of  stipends,  and  for  church  repairs, 
and  by  a  subsequent  stat.  56  Geo.  3,  c.  65  (local)  it  was  enacted,  that  the 
Avardens,  overseers,  and  inhabitants  in  vestry  might  make  a  rate  to  a  large 
amount.  It  was  held,  on  the  vestry  refusing  to  make  a  rate  for  the  above 
purposes  under  the  last  mentioned  aet,  that  the  Court  had  jurisdiction  to 
issue  a  mandamus  to  command  such  vestry  so  to  do,  because  the  making 
of  snch  a  rate  is  not  a  matter  of  ecclesiastical  cognizance,  it  being  expressly 
required  by  act  of  Parliament. (/)  And  the  Court  will  grant  such  a  writ, 
notwithstanding  the  act  contain  a  clause  reserving  all  ecclesiastical  jurisdic- 
tion, if  it  appear  from  the  rest  of  the  act  that  the  temporal  Court  was 

.ited).  R.  V.  St  Margaret's,  4  M.  &  S.  250.  See  R.  v.  Coleridge,  2  B.  &  A.  80C.f 
11.  V.  Wilson,  5  D.  &R.  602.  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396.  R.  v.  St.  John 
(Churchwardens),  IGL.  J.,  N.  S.  54,  M.  C. 

(A)  R.  V.  St.  Margaret's,  4  M.  &  S.  249,  252  ;  and  see  5  T.  R.  364.  Supra,  also 
5  A.  &  E.  584.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  SG.f  R.  v.  St.  Margaret's,  8  A.  &  E.  889.  S.  P. 
1  P.  &  D.  116.     See  tit.  "Act  of  Parliament." 

(i)  R.  V.  Thomas,  3  G.  &  D.  485.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  589.f  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  295, 
Q.  B.     R.  V.  Dalby,  3  Q.  B.  602.t     See  tit.  "  Custom." 

(y)  R.  V.  Thomas,  supra.  R.  v.  Pickles,  3  Q.  B.  599,t  n.  (a).  S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N. 
L.  40,  Q.  B. 

(k)  R.  V.  Dalby,  3  Q.  B.  602.t 

(/)  R.  V.  St.  Saviour's  (Wardens),  1  N.  &  P.  496.t  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  126.  S.  C. 
T  A.  &  E.  925,f  where  see  form  of  writ,  Return,  &c.;  and  see  ante,  p.  22.  See  tit. 
••  Act  of  Parliament." 


116  tapping's    mandamus. 

intended  to  have  at  least  concurrent  jurisdiction ;  for  if  an  act  of  Parlia- 
ment impose  a  temporal  duty,  it  is  incumbent  upon  the  Court  of  B.  R.  to 
enforce  a  pcrforniauce  of  it,(m)  so  that  where  such  an  act  directs  a  body 
creatid  by  it  to  levy  church-rates,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  command  it,  by 
mandamus  to  levy  the  rate,  and  will  not  confine  the  writ  to  the  ordering 
it  to  assemble  for  the  purpose  of  determining  whether  it  will  levy  the  rate 
or  not,  as  in  those  cases  where  the  legal  capacity  to  make  such  a  rate 
jemains  as  at  common  law.(/() 

The  Court  will  not  require  the  making  and  levying  of  a  rate  which  is 
illegal,  &c.  Thus,  inasmuch  as  a  rate  to  reimburse  churchwardens, 
such  sums  as  they  have  expended,  or  might  thereafter  expend,  on  the 
parish  church,  would  be  bad  on  the  face  of  it,  as  in  part  retrospective,  the 

^, — I  *Court  of  B.  B.  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  commanding  them  to 
make  such  ratc.(o) 

.]     Returns. — A  return  to  such  a  writ,  shewing  the  state  of  the 


church,  is  good.(2j)  So  inasmuch  as  churchwardens  are  by  law  bound  to 
Bupply  estimates  to  the  parishioners  in  vestry,  of  the  probable  amount 
requii-ed  for  a  church-rate,  therefore  where  a  local  act  substituted  a  special 
vestry  for  the  parishioners  at  large,  and  authorised  them  to  make  church- 
rates,  poor-rates,  and  highway-rates,  and  the  Court  of  B.  B.  had  issued  a 
mandamus  to  the  select  vestry  to  make  a  church-rate,  it  was  held  that  the 
return  of  a  refusal  of  the  churchwardens  to  supply  any  estimates  was  a 
eufficient  excuse  for  disobedience  to  the  writ,  and,  therefore,  a  good  return, 
as  the  local  act  contained  nothing  to  alter  the  general  duties  of  church- 
wardens.(5') 

.]     Recovery  of  Rate. — The  writ  lies  to  command  justices,  &c.,  to 

meet  and  examine  into  a  complaint  by  one  churchwarden  against  an 
inhabitant  for  refusing  to  pay  a  church-rate,  and  to  hear  and  determine 
Buch  complaint, (r)  although  in  a  parish  where  there  are  several  church- 
wardens, each  usually  acting  for  a  separate  district,  for  one  churchwarden 
may  legally  lay  a  complaint,  under  stat.  53  Geo.  3,  c.  127,  s.  7,  against  a 
resident  in  his  district  for  non-payment  of  church-rates. (.s) 

So  it  lies  to  command  quarter  sessions  to  enter  continuances,  and  hear 
an  appeal  against  a  church-rate. (/) 

So  it  lies  to  command  justices  to  issue  their  distress  warrant  to  enforce 
the  payment  of  a  church  building-rate,  levied  in  pursuance  of  a  local 
act.(«)     It  was,  however,  before  the  passing  of  the  late  stat.  6  &  7  Vict. 

(m)  R.  v.  St.  Margaret,  1  P.  &  D.  116.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  889.f  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D. 
510.     S.  C.  1  W.  W.  &  H.  673.     See  ante,  p.  30. 

{a)  8  A.  &  E.  899.|     S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  116.     Supra,  see  ante,  p.  65. 

(o)  R.  V.  Haworth,  12  East,  555. 

{p)  7  A.  &  E.  737,t  note,  per  Lord  Denman,  C.  .J.     See  post,  tit.  "Return." 

[q)  R.  V.  St.  Margaret's,  2  P.  &  D.  510. 

(r)  R.  V.  Wrottesley,  1  B.  &  Ad.  6t8.f  R.  v.  Freeman,  2  Ld.  Ken.  19  R.  v. 
Lancash.  (J.),  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  103,  M.  C. 

Is)  R.  V.  Fenton,  1  G.  &  D.  17.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  480.t 

[t)  R.  V.  Statfordsh.  (J.),  6  N.  &  M.  477-1  S.  C.  4  A.  &  E.  844.f  See  tit. 
*  Appeal." 

(m)  R.  v.  Buckinghamsh.  (J.),  1  N.  &  P.  503,-|-  and  cases  there  cited. 


CUURCnWARDEN.  117 

c.  67,  s.  3,  a  rule  with  the  Court  to  refuse  the  writ  in  those  cases  whero 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  justices  was  doubtful ;  and  it  has  been  held  not  to  be 
Bufficient  freedom  from  doubt,  that  the  rate  sought  to  be  enforced  has  been 
confirmed  in  the  Consistorial  Court,  although  it  did  not  appear  that  such 
question  was  any  longer  dcpcnding,(y)  for  if  the  validity  of  the  rate  had 
at  any  time  been  questioned,  the  Court  would  not  interfere.  But  at  such 
last-mentioned  statute  in  terms  grants  an  entire  indemnity  to  those  who 
legally  execute  the  command  of  a  mandamus,  it  is  apprehended  that  the 
Court  will  in  future  be  more  liberal  in  its  dispensation  of  the  writ. 

.]     Loans,  &c.  ;  RafB  for  Payment. — The  writ   has  often    been 

granted  to  command  churchwardens  to  make  and  raise  one  or  more  rates, 
for  the  repayment  of  principal  money,  with  interest,  borrowed  on  the  cre- 
dit of  the  *parish  and  church-rates,  under  and  conformably  with  ^  ^^.q  -i 
the  Church  Building  Acts,  58  Geo.  3,  c.  45,  and  59  Geo.  3,  c.  '-  '  -* 
134, (w)  for  the  making  of  such  a  rate  is  authorized  and  required  by  such 
acts  ;  and,  therefore,  although  it  be  raised  for  the  purpose  of  repairing  the 
church,  and  in  the  nature  of  a  church-rate,  yet,  in  fact,  as  the  inhabitants 
have  assented  to  borrow  money  on  the  credit  of  the  rates,  the  making  a 
rate  to  pay  a  debt  is  not  a  matter  of  ecclesiastical  cognizance,  but  a  tem- 
poral duty.(x) 

.]     Returns. — The  return  to  such  a  writ  may  consist  of  any  fact.s 

which  traverse  the  supposal  of  the  writ,  or  which  shew  illegality  in  the 
security  charging  the  rates,  either  by  means  of  fraud,  or  by  the  absence 
or  impropriety  of  any  of  the  statutory  requisitions,  &c.,  or  that  the  loan 
was  not  raised  at  the  time  the  repairs  were  done  for  the  laying  of  the  rates; 
for  the  repayment,  &c.,  should  commence  immediately,  and  be  continued, 
so  as /to  pay  oif  the  debt  by  ten  annual  instalments. (//)  So  any  special 
agreement  with  the  prosecutor,  if  an  answer  to  the  writ  may  be  properly 
the  subject  of  a  return. (?;)  But  it  is  no  answer  to  such  a  writ,  that  the 
applicant  may  proceed  at  law  upon  a  bond  given  as  a  collateral  security, 
for  that  does  not  affect  the  rates. (a) 

Church  Rate.]     See  tit.  Church. 

Churchwarden.]     The  writ  of  mandamus  does  not  lie  where  the  place 

(w)  R.  V.  Sillifant,  4  A.  &  E.  354.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  G41,f  but  see  tit.  "  Quarter 
Sessions,  Justices,"  and  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  App. 

{w)  R.  V.  Brancaster  (Churchwardens),  2  N.  &  P.  580.  S.  C.  7  A.  &  E.  4.58J- 
where  see  form  of  writ,  pleadings,  &c.  R.  v.  Dursley  (Churchwardens),  5  A.  &  E. 
lO.f  S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  333.t  R.  v.  Pembroke  (Churcliwardens),  5  A.  k  E.  G03.f 
S.  C."  1  N.  &  P.  G9.t  And  see  R.  v.  Briglitou  (Churchwardens),  1  N.  &  P.  775.t  S. 
C.  6  A.  &  E.  794.f     See  tit.  "  Parish." 

{x)  R.  V.  Lambeth  (Churchwardens),  2  B.  &  Ad.  651.f  And  see  I  P.  k  D.  123, 
per  Lord  Deuman,  C.  J.     Sec  ante,  p.  66. 

{y)  R.  V.  Dursley,  b  A.  &  E.  lO.f  S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  333.1  R.  v.  Lambeth,  2  B.  & 
Ad.  651.t  R.  V.  Carpenter,  6  A.  &  E.  794.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  775.  See  post,  tit. 
"Return." 

{z)  See  R.  v.  Pembroke  (Churchwardens),  5  A.  &  E.  603.f     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  69.f 

(a)  5  A.  &  E.  13,f  per  Coleridge,  J. 


Churchwarden — Lis  pendens 

-      12 

69 

Non  fuit  electus 

- 

-     72 

10 

Rule 

- 

-     1?, 

TO 

Form  of  writ 

- 

-     13 

to 

Restoration 

- 

-     T3 

10 

Accounts 

- 

-     74 

11 

Allowance    - 

- 

-     74 

11 

Reimbursement 

- 

-     74 

12 

Inspection,  &c. 

- 

-     74 

12 

Auditors  of  accounts 

- 

-     74 

118  TAPPINGS     MANDAMUS. 

is  one  of  mere  service ;  but  in  the  case  of  a  temporal  office,  as  that  of 
churchwarden,  it  does,(i)  he  being  both  a  public  and  a  temporal  officer,('-) 
his  office  being  one  of  temporal  trust,  and  concerned  in  the  execution  of 
justice,  and  whereof  the  common  law  takes  notice, (<?)  for  he  has,  amongst 
other  things,  the  ordering  of  the  goods  of  the  church. (e)  His  office  has 
also  been  enlarged  by  sundry  acts  of  Parliament. (/) 

It  has,  however,  been  held  that  the  writ  docs  not  lie  for  churchwardens 
*put  in  by  order  of  the  bishop,  parson,  or  ecclesiastical  law,  but 
^  only  of  those  elected  according  to  the  custom,  &c.(<j) 

This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 

Churchwardens. 
Election 
Appointment  - 
Admission 
Swearing  in     - 
Returns 

Pauperism 

Labourer 

Incapax. 

Inhibition 

.]  Election. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  rector  and  Church- 
wardens of  a  parish  to  convene  a  vestry  for  the  purpose  of  electing  church- 
wardens 3  (/i)  also  for  electing  churchwardens  for  the  remainder  of  the 
year.(0 

So  it  has  been  granted  to  command  the  inhabitants  of  a  parish  liable 
to  contribute  to  the  church-rate,  to  meet  and  assemble  together  with  the 
minister,  in  order  to  elect  churchwardens  ;(y)  and  where,  to  such  a  man- 
damus, the  return  stated  an  immemorial  custom  in  the  parish  to  have  no 
churchwarden,  and  that  the  duties  appertaining  by  law  to  the  office  had 
been  from  time  out  of  mind  discharged  by  the  overseers  of  the  poor,  it 
was  held,  that  inasmuch  as  overseers  had  not  existed  time  out  of  mind, 

{b)  R.  v.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233,  11,  13.     See  post,  tit.  "  Office." 

(c)  See  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  8  East,  218  ;  4  Yin.  Abr.  525,  pi.  4,  in  marg. 
Anon.,  Freem.  21.  He's  case,  1  Vent.  143,  2G7.  And  see  Hurst's  case,  1  Lev.  75. 
and  2  Sid.  112.  R.  v.  Rich,  Comb.  147.  Bishop's  case,  2  Roll.  71.  Cas.  t.  Hard. 
379. 

{d)  Estwick  V.  London  (City),  Sty.  42.  And  see  Sty.  458,  citing  12  Hen.  7. 
Leigh's  case,  3  Mod.  335.     R.  v.  White,  Ld.  Raym.  1379. 

(e)  R.  T.  Kingscleere,  2  Lev.  18. 

(/)  Anon.,  1  Vent.  267.  Hughs  v.  Needham,  3  Keb.  418.  See  tit.  "Act  of 
Parliament." 

{ff)  6  Hen.  7,  14,  cited  in  R.  v.  Apleford,  2  Keb.  863.  See  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb. 
67.     See  tit.  "  Custom." 

[h)  R.  V.  Dr.  D'Oyly  and  Others.  R.  v.  Hedger,  4  P.  &  D.  52.  S.  C.  12  A.  &  E. 
139,t  contra.  Anon.,  Stra.  686.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.)  R.  v.  We.'^tminster,  5  A. 
&  E.  391.t  R.  V.  Birmingham  (Rector,  &c.),  7  A.  &  E.  254.t  R.  v.  Wix  (Inhabs.), 
2  B.  &  Ad.  197.t  Stutter  v.  Freston,  Str.  52.  See  tits.  "  Office,"  (Election,)  "  Over- 
seer," "Parish,"  "Sidesman." 

(0  R.  V.  Lambeth,  3  N.  &  P.  416.  S.  C.  8  A.  &.  E.  356.f  S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  113, 
M.  C. 

(/)  R.  V.  Wix  (Inhabs.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  197-1  Sutter  v.  Freston,  Str.  52. 


CHURCHWARDEN.  119 

and  as  there  were  necessary  duties  appertaining  to  churchwardens,  and 
there  must  have  been  some  persons  bound  by  law  to  discharge  thoBC 
duties,  the  custom  set  out  in  the  return  was  bad.(A-) 

So  the  writ  will  be  gi-anted  where  there  is  an  election  de  facto,  but 
which  is  void.  So,  if  the  election  be  so  improperly  conducted  that  the 
proceedings  are  merely  prima  faci  void,  the  Court  will,  in  order  to  try  its 
validity,  grant  a  mandamus  to  convene  a  meeting  to  elect,  &c.,  because, 
for  the  office  of  churchwarden,  quo  warranto  does  not  lie.(?)  But  in  one 
case  where,  although  it  was  stated  that  the  doors  were  closed  during  the 
election,  yet  it  did  not  distinctly  appear  that  any  rated  inhabitant  waf 
excluded  from  ^voting,  the  Court  refused  to  grant  a  mandamus  for  a  r^-jri-i 
fresh  election ;  but  if  such  exclusion  had  appeared,  the  Court  would 
have  granted  the  writ,  without  inquiring  strictly  whether  the  number  of  per- 
sons excluded  were,  in  fact,  such  as  to  aflFect  the  result  of  the  election. (m) 

So  it  has  been  granted  to  command  parish  officers  to  produce  the  rate 
and  other  books  at  the  scrutiny  of  a  poll  which  had  been  taken  at  the 
election  of  churchwardens. («) 

.]  Appointment. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  justices 

of  the  peace  to  appoint  churchwardens  and  overseers  of  the  poor  in  an  ex- 
tra parochial  place,  upon  an  affidavit  that  there  was  much  occasion  for 
such  officers,  in  order  that  poor-rates  to  relieve  the  poor,  might  be  made.(o) 

.]  Admission. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  is  in  the  constant  habit  of 

granting  the  writ,  in  order  to  command  the  admission  of  a  churchwarden 
to  the  duties  of  his  office  ;(^)  and  if  two  be  elected,  both  must  be  admit- 
ted, and  cross  mandamuses  will  be  granted  for  that  purpose,  (g^)  because 
the  office  is  not  the  subject  of  a  quo  warranto  information. (r) 

.]  Swearing  in. — So,  in  like  manner,  the  writ  is  constantly  grant- 
ed to  command  the  swearing  in  of  a  churchwarden ;  for,  although  it  haf:< 
been  resolved  that  he  may  execute  his  office  before  he  is  sworn,  yet  it  is 
convenient  he  should  be  so  sworn. (.?)     So  it  has  been  granted  to  swear  in 

{k)  2  B.  &  Ad.  197,1  supra. 

(/)-R.  V.  Birmingham,  7  A.  &  E.  254.f  R.  v.  Derby  (Councillors),  7  A.  &  E.  422. | 
See  tit.  "  Office,"  (Election).  Ante,  p.  27. 

(to)  R.  v.  Lambeth,  3  N.  &  P.  416.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  356.f 

\n)  R.  V.  Fall,  1  G.  &  D.  118.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  636.f  See  post,  tit.  '•  Office." 

(o)  Anon.,  P.  2  Geo.  2;  1  Barn.  155. 

Ip)  R.  v.  Williams,  8  B.  &  0.  eSl.f  S.  C.  3  M.  &  R.  402  ;  see  form  of  writ.  R.  v. 
Middlesex  (Archdeacon,  &c.),  5  N.  &  M.  494.f  Anon.,  2  Chit.  254.f  Trem.  PI.  Cor. 
469,  where  see  form  of  writ. 

{q)  R.  V.  Harris,  Burr.  1420.  S.  C.#W.  Blac.  430,  where  see  form  of  writ.  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (D.  4).  See  infra.  "Swearing  in,"  and  tit.  "  Office,"  (Admission). 

(r)  See  ante,  p.  26,  29. 

(s)  3  Bl.  Com.  111.  Northampton's  case,  Carth.  118.  R.  v.  Rees,  Carth.  393.  S. 
C.  5  Mod.  325.  S.  C.  Comb.  417.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  116.  R.  v.  Henchman,  Cas.  t.  Hard. 
130.  Carpenter's  case,  Raym.  439,  where  see  direction  of  writ,  and  see  return. 
Anon.,  1  Vent.  115.  R.  v.  Dr.  Harris,  1  W.  Blac.  429.  S.  C.  Burr.  1420,  where  seo 
form  of  writ.  Patrick's  case,  Raym.  111.  Anon.,  Frecm.  366.  R.  v.  Twittv,  7  Mod. 
83.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  433.  S.  C.  Holt,  442.  Love  v.  Dr.  Bently,  11  Mod.  134.  Stoughton 
V.  Reynolds,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  274.  S.  C.  Fort.  168.  S.  C.  Stra.  1045.  Hubbard  v.  Pen- 
rice,  Stra.  1246.  R.  v.  Harwood,  8  Mod.  380.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1405  ;  the  authority  of 
the  report  of  this  case  in  8  Mod.  is  impugned,  and  that  in  Ld.  Raym.  1405  upheld  ; 


120  tapping's    mandamus. 

a  second  *cburchwardcn,(/)  whether  chosen  by  the  parishioners,(M) 
t  J  cither  by  an  election  according  tocuston),(;')  or  by  the  parishioners, 
who  ol'  common  right  may  make  the  election. (»') 

The  writ  for  this  purpose  will  be  granted  against  a  bishop,  his  deputy, 
an  archdeacon,  or  other  competent  judge  in  that  behalf,  whose  duty  it  is 
to  swear  in,  &c.  j(.<)  and  this,  although  there  be  another  churchwarden 
peaceably  in  possession  of  the  office,  for  such  second  churchwarden  is  not 
otherwise  enabled  to  try  his  right  to  the  office,(3/)  it  not  being  the  sub- 
ject of  quo  warranto(2). 

The  duty  of  swearing  in,  is  ministerial  merely. (a) 

.]  Return,  Pauj>erlsm,  Labourer,  &c. — It  is  because   the   duty  of 

swearing  in  a  churchwarden  is  ministerial  merely,  that  no  excuse  for  the 
nonperformance  of  it,  can  be  the  subject  of  a  valid  return  to  a  writ  com- 
manding it.  Thus,  a  return  that  the  prosecutor  was  a  "pauper  lactarius 
(a  poor  dairyman)  et  servus  et  minus  habilis  et  idoneus  ad  exequendum 
officiuui  praedictum,"  has  been  held  to  be  bad.  So  a  return  that  the  pro- 
secutor is  "  servus,"  has  been  held  not  to  be  good,  upon  the  principle 
that  the  person  whose  duty  it  is  to  swear  in,  is,  for  that  purpose,  a  minis- 
terial officer  merely,  and  cannot  refuse  to  exercise  his  office, (i)  nor  inquire 

Bee  R.  V.  Williams,  3  M.  &  R.  405,  per  Bayley,  J.  R.v.  Chester  (City),  5  Mod  11  ; 
Fitz.  195;  Ld.  Raym.  1495.  Parish  of  St.  Balaunce's  case,  Palm.  50;  the  report  says, 
"a  special  ^vrit  was  prayed, — it  is  however  clear,  that  such  writ  was  a  mandamus, 
as  it  contained  the  alterative  clause,  '  vel  coram  nobis  significet  quare  non,'  &c.," 
ante,  p.  6.  R.  v.  Rice,  5  Mod.  325,  and  cases  there  cited.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  116.  S.  C.  3 
Salk.  90.  S.  C.  Comb.  417.  S.  C.  Ccrth.  393.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  138.  Leigh's  case,  3 
Mod.  335  ;  Burr.  1421.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  430.  R.  v.  Simpson,  8  Mod.  325.  S.  C.  Stra. 
609.  R.  t.  White,  Ld.  Raym.  1379  ;  March,  101.  R.  v.  0.\enden,  1  Show.  219.  R.  t. 
White,  8  Mod.  325.  R.  v.  Ward,  1  Barn.  381.  Morgan  v.  Cardigan  (Archdeacon),  I 
Salk.  166.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  138.  Anon.,  2  Chit.  254.t  Ex  parte  Lowe,  4  D.  15.  R.  v. 
Chester  (Archdeacon),  1  A.  &  E.  342.t  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  413.  Ex  parte  Wingfield,3 
A.  &  E.  614.t  R.  v.  Middlesex,  3  A.  &  E.  615.f  S.  C.  5  N.&M.  494t  Ex  parte  Duf- 
field,  3  A.  &  E.  617.t  See  Campbell  v.  Maund,  5  A.  &  E.  8T6.f  R.  v.  Litchfield 
(Archdeacon),  5  N.  &  M.  42. f  Trem.  pi.  Cor.  469,  where  see  form  of  writ.  Bac.  Abr. 
tit.  "Man."(C).  See  tits.  "  Chapelvvardens,"  "Sidesman." 

(t)  Dr.  King's  case,  1  Keb.  517,  citing  Warner's  case,  15  Car.  1,  Rot.  44.  S.  C.  1 
Keb.  521.  See  tit.  "Office"  (Swearing  in). 

(m)  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  66,  citing  Sutton  Vallance's  case,  T.  17  Jac,  March,  15 
Car.  1,  and  H.  17  Car.  1,  there  cited.  See  also  2  Lut.  1010,  where  see  the  sugges- 
tion, writ,  and  traverse. 

(y)  Polhill  v.  Blany,  2  Keb.  753.  R.  v.  Guy,  6  Mod.  89,  and  cases  there  cited. 
The  Bishop's  case,  2  Roll.  106,  107.  Evelin's  case,  Cro.  Car.  551,  589.  S.  C.  Jones, 
439.  S.  C.  2  Roll.  Abr.  234.  And  see  R.  v.  Rushvvorth,  W.  Kely.  287.  S.  C.  7  Mod. 
217;  March.  22,  60;  Noy,  31.  Catten  v.  Barwick,  Stra.  145.  Hubbard  v.  Penrice, 
Stra.  1246.  Anon.,  1  Vent.  267.  Hughs  v.  Ncedham,  3  Keb.  418.  Per  Glyn,  C.  J., 
in  2  Sid.  112.  * 

[w]  Morgan  v.  Cardigan,  1  Salk.  166.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  138 ;  Noy,  139.  Ward  r. 
Drampston,  3  Lev.  362.  Dawson  v.  Fowle,  Hard.  378. 

{x)  R.  V.  Winchester,  7  East,  573.  R.  v.  Dr.  Harris,  1  W.  Blac.  429.  S.  C.  Burr. 
1420.    R.  V.  Williams,  3  M.  &  R.  402.  Hughs  v.  Needham,  3  Keb.  418. 

iy)  See  Dr.  King's  case,  1  Keb.  517.      S.  C.  1  Keb.  521.  See  supra,  "  Admission." 

Izj  See  tit.  "  Ollice"  (Election),  ante,  p.  69. 

(a)  R.  V.  Rees,  12  Mod.  116.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  138.  R.  v.  Williams,  8  B.&  C.  681.f 
S.  C.  3  M.  &  R.  404.  R.  v.  White,  Ld.  Raym.  1379,  cited  and  approved  upon  this 
point  in  R.  v.  Simpson,  Stra.  C09,  894.  R.  V.  Harris,  Burr.  1420.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac. 
430. 

(6)  12  Mod.  116.     S.  C.  3  Salk.  90.     S.  C.  5  Mod.  325.     S.  C.  Comb.  417.     S.  0. 


CHURCHWARDEN.  121 

*iuto  the  ability,  &e.,  of  the  party  elected  ;  nor  return  that  such  party 
is  incompetent  to  act;  nor  try  the  validity  of  the  votes;  for,  it  ia  L  '■^i 
argued,  why  should  such  ministerial  officer  be  judge,  rather  than  those  who  are 
most  concerned  in  interest,  namely  the  parishioners?  and  it  is  not  to  be 
presumed,  that  the  ordinary,  archdeacon,  &c.,  will  take  more  care  to  put 
a  fit  and  able  person  into  this  office,  than  they  who  have  the  power  to 
choose,  and  are  answerable  for,  him.(r) 

.] '.  Inhibition. — So  a  return  by  an   archdeacon,  that  before 

the  coming  of  the  writ,  he  received  an  inhibition  from  the  bishop,  with  a 
signification  that  he  had  taken  upon  himself  to  act  in  the  premises,  is 
bad.(^/) 

.]     .  Lis  pendens  is  not  a  good  return  to  such  a  writ.  Thus, 

where  the  Ecclesiastical  Judge  returned  cross  causes,  depending  before 
himself,  contesting  the  right  of  election,  and  that  ho  could  not  admit  and 
swear  them  until  it  should  have  been  judicially  determined  that  they  were 
duly  elected;  such  return  was  adjudged  bad,  on  the  ground  that  both 
writs  ought  to  have  been  obeyed,  for  such  a  course  would  not  prejudice 
the  right  of  cither  claimant. (^) 

.]  Non  fuit  elechis. — So   to  such  a  mandamus  to   swear  in,  &c.,  it 

would  seem  that  formerly  a  return  of  quod  non  fuit  electus  generally, 
because  the  ordinary  could  not  judge  of  the  election,  was  bad.(  /')  But  it 
has  since  been  held,  that  if  the  writ  contain  the  usual  suggestion  that  the 
prosecutors  were  duly  elected,  &c.,  the  officer  may,  at  the  peril  of  an 
action,  return,  that  the  prosecutor  was  not  dul}'  elected,  and  thus  raise 
the  question  in  an  action  for  a  false  return, (y)  and  such  a  return  cannot 

Carth.  303.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  138.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  165,  5,  IGG.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man." 
(C).  Assuming,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  the  ordinary  to  be  the  judge  of  the  fit- 
ness of  him  elected  churclivvarden,  yet  the  returns  above  stated  would,  it  is  appre- 
hended, be  insuflicient  in  substance,  for  pauperism  is  no  ground  of  disqualification  : 
thus  the  Roman  Law,  Inst.  1,  26,  s.  3,  "  suspectum  enim  eum  putamus,  qui  mori- 
bus  talis  est,  ut  suspectus  sit:  enimvero  tutor  vel  curator,  quamvis  pauper  est,  fide- 
lis  tamcn  et  diligens,  removendus  non  est  quasi  suspectus."  The  same  rule  obtains 
in  equity,  a  trustee  not  being  removable  simply  on  account  of  poverty.  See  tits. 
"Administration,"  "  Will." 

(c)  R.  V.  Rice,  5  Mod.  326.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  166,  and  cases  there  cited.  R.  v.  Dr. 
Henchman,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  130,  n.  (a)  ;  Burr.  1423.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  430.  Tlie  strict- 
ness of  the  doctrine,  as  stated  in  the  text,  would  seem  by  subsequent  cases  to  have 
been  somewhat  relaxed;  see  infra,  "Non  fuit  electus." 

[d)  R.  V.  Simpson,  Stra.  609.  S.  C.  8  Mod.  325.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1379.  R.  v. 
D.-.  Henchman,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  130,  n.  («).  See  also  Stra.  640.  R.  v.  Dr.  Ward,  1  Bar- 
nard, 381.  (Jem.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (D.  4.)  See  tits.  "Inhibition,"  "Registrar,"  (Re- 
turn. 

{(•)  Sec  ante,  p.  23.  R.  v.  Harris,  Burr.  1421.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  430.  R.  v.  Reyncll, 
T.  8  &  9  Geo.  2;  Gas.  t.  Hard.  130,  n.  (1).  Carpenter's  case,  Raym.  439.  R.  v. 
Middlesex,  5  N.  &  M.  494  ;t  F.  g.  195;  Ray.  440.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  4.  See 
tits.  "Administration"  (Return,  Lis  pendens),  "  Office,"  (Election),  "  Will,"  (Re- 
turn, Lis  pendens). 

(/)  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3,  4.  R.  v.  White,  Ld.  Raym.  1379.  S.  C.  8  Mod. 
325.  R.  V.  Williams,  8  B.  &  C.  681.f  R.  v.  Harris,  Burr.  1420.    See  Stra.  894,  895. 

(ff)  R.  V.  Williams,  3  M.  &  R.  402.  S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  681.t  R-  v.  White,  Ld.  Raym. 
1379.  S.  C.  8  Mod.  380,  325,  n.  (a).  R.  v.  Harwood,  Ld.  Raym.  1405.  Anthony  v. 
Leger,  1  Hagg.  10,  cited  in  R.  v.  Middlesex,  5  N.  &  M.  494,f  n.  (a),  c.  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "Man."  D.  4.  See  tits.  "Return"  (Traverse),  "  False  Return,"  (Traverse.)  Cas. 


122  TAPPINGS     MANDAMUS. 

be  quashed  for  insufficiency. (7i)  For  it  seems  that  where  the  ordinary 
knows  that  the  party  applying  to  be  sworn,  &c.  has  no  legal  title  to  the 
^-o-.  office,  it  is  *less  objectionable  to  return  non  debito  modo  electus, 
"■  than  to  administer  an  oath  under  circumstances  which  render  it  idle 

and  inoperative. ((■)  In  fact,  such  a  return  may  now  be  considered  to  be  good. 

As  to  the  form  of  the  traverse ;  if  the  writ  be  to  admit  two  church- 
wardens "  debito  modo  elccti,"  the  return  will  be  sufficient  if  it  say, 
"  non  fucrunt  debito  modo  electi,"  for  both  must  have  been  so  elected,  or 
the  writ  is  insufficient. Q')  So,  if  the  writ  be  generally  "to  swear  those 
that  are  chosen,"  a  general  return  that  "  they  were  not  chosen,"  is  good. 
So,  if  the  writ  set  forth  specially  that  they  were  chosen  "  debito  modo," 
a  return  that  they  were  not  chosen  '^ debito  modo,"  is  good;  but  such  a 
return  to  a  general  writ  has  been  held  to  be  bad,(A;)  for  a  return  of  "  not 
duly  elected"  cannot  be  made  to  a  writ  which  merely  states  that  "  they 
were  elected."(0  But  if  the  writ  recite  that  "  they  have  been  duly 
elected,"  then,  as  before  stated,  such  a  return  is  good.(m) 

.     Rule. — The  rule  for  a  mandamus  to  swear  in  a  churchwarden 

is  absolute  in  the  first  instance,  where  there  is  no  rival  candidate  (though 
others  claim  to  have  been  elected,)  and  no  reason  is  assigned  for  the  re- 
fusal to  administer  the  oath,  because  a  mandamus  to  swear  in  merely, 
does  not  confer  any  title.(«)  But  the  applicant  should  be  prepared  with 
an  affidavit  of  his  due  election,  demand,  and  refusal,  and  of  notice  to  the 
defendant  of  the  application  to  the  Court ;  the  ground  of  refusal  need 
not,  however,  appear  by  the  affidavit  in  support  of  the  rule.(o) 

.     Form  of  writ. — The  same  writ  may  command  the  admission  of 

two  churchwardens. (p) 

t.  Hard.  130,  n.  (1).  R.  v.  Cornwall  (Corp.),  11  Mod.  1T4,  n.  [e).  R.  v.  Lambert,  12 
Mod.  3.  Austin  v.  Gervas,  2  Barn.  242.  R.  t.  Twitty,  2  Salk.  434.  Fitz.  195. 
Stra.  895.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  412. 

[h]  3  M.  &  R.  402.  S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  681,1  supra.  See  ante,  p.  6,  and  post,  tit.. 
"  False  Return." 

[i)  R.  V.  Middlesex,  5  N.  &  M.  497,t  n.  (a).  Cas.  t.  Hard.  130,  n.  (1)  ;  Ld.  Raym. 
1405,  and  also  1379.     See  ante,  n.  (g). 

(;•)  R.  V.  Twitty,  2  Salk.  434.  S.  C.  1  Mod.  83.  S.  C.  Holt,  442.  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "  Man,"  D.  3.  R.  v.  Chester  (City),  5  Mod.  11  ;  Fitzg.  195,  Ld.  Raym.  1495. 
R.  T.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  Doug.  79,  80.  Hubbard  v.  Penrice,  Stra.  1245  ;  but 
see  R.  V.  Guise,  3  Salk.  88.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1008.  S.  C.  6  Mod.  89,  See  tit. 
**  Return  "  '*  Tra-verse  '^  post. 

{k)  See  n.  (j),  supra.  R.  v.  Guy,  6  Mod.  89.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  138,  559,  1008, 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.) 

(Z)  R.  V.  Guy,  6  Mod.  89.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  88.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1008.  R.  v. 
Twitty,  7  Mod.  83.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  434.  R.  v.  Taunton,  Cowp.  413.  R.  v.  Hench- 
man, Cas.  t.  Hard.  130.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)     See  post,  tit.  "  Return." 

[m)  R.  V.  Williams,  8  B.  &  C.  681,  682,  683.t  S.  C.  3  M.  &  R.  402.  R.  v. 
Twitty,  2  Salk.  434.     See  post,  tits.  "  Return,"  "  Plea,'  "  Traverse." 

[n]  R.  V.  Litchfield,  5  N.  &  M.  42. f  S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  463  ;  Anon.,  2  Chit.  254.f 
Ex  parte  Lowe,  4  D.  15,  and  n.  (a).  Ex  parte  Winfield,  3  A.  &  E.  614.f  Ex  parte 
Duffield,  3  A.  &  E.  6l7.t  Anon.  2  Chit.  254.f  Ex  parte  Penruddock,  1  H.  &  W. 
347.     See  tit.  Ind.  "  Efifect  of  Mandamus." 

(o)  3  A.  &  E.  614 ;t  3  A.  &  E.  618,t  supra.  See  tit.  "Application"  (Notice), 
(Demand  and  Refusal.) 

{p)  R.  V.  Twitty,  2  Salk.  434.     See  Ind.  tit.  "  Mandamus"  (Mandatory  Clause). 


CITIZEN.  123 

.]  Restoration. — The  writ  will  also  be  granted  to  restore  a  church- 
warden who  had  been  improperly  removed  from  his  office. (</) 

.]     *Accotmts,  Allowance. — It  lies  to  command  justices  to  p  ^^^^  -i 

examine  and  allow  churchwardens'  accounts,  in  pursuance  of  stat. 
60  Geo.  3,  c.  69,  s.  l.(r) 

.]  Reimbursement. — Inasmuch  as  a  rate  to  reimburse  church- 
wardens such  sums  as  they  had  expended,  or  might  thereafter  expend, 
on  the  parish  church,  would  be  bad  on  the  face  of  it,  as  in  part  retrospec- 
tive, therefore  the  Court  of  B.  II.  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  to  make 
such  rate.(s) 

.]     Accounts,  Inspection,  &c. — It  lies  to  command  churchwardens 

to  allow  an  inspection  of  their  accounts,  under  stat.  17  Geo.  2,  c.  38,  s. 
1,  but  the  applicant  must  state  and  show  some  public  ground  for  desiring 
such  inspection ;  and  this,  notwithstanding  sect.  14  of  the  act,  imposes  a 
penalty  upon  churchwardens  wrongfully  refusing  an  inspection. (/)  So  it 
lies  to  command  quarter  sessions  to  hear  and  determine  a  complaint 
against  ex-churchwardens  for  not  signing,  passing,  and  delivering  their 
accounts,  pursuant  to  stat.  17  Geo.  2,  c.  88.  But  the  defendants  may 
show  that  they  have,  in  fact,  signed,  &c.,  their  accounts. (?() 

.]     Auditors  of  Accounts. — So  it  will  be  granted  to  command 

churchwardens  to  assemble  the  parishioners  in  the  manner  required  by 
their  parish  act,  in  order  to  elect  auditors  of  their  accounts. (f) 

Citizen.]  Admission. — By  stat.  12  Geo.  3.  c.  21,  s.  l,(it")  it  is  en- 
acted, that  where  any  person  entitled  to  be  admitted  a  citizen,  &c.,  of  any 
city,  &c.,  shall  apply  to  the  mayor,  &c.,  to  be  admitted,  and  the  mayor, 
&c.,  shall  not  admit  him  within  one  month  after  notice,  a  mandamus  shall 
issue  to  compel  him  so  to  do,  and  he  shall  pay  all  costs.  See,  however, 
the  important  provisions  of  the  subsequent  statute  of  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89(x) 
on  this  subject. 

.]     Restoration. — It  lies  also  to  restore  a  citizen  to  his  franchise 


{q)  The  Protector  and  Craford,  Sty.  457,  per  Glyn,  C.  J.;  and  see  R.  v.  Patrick, 
1  Keb.  610.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  66.  Evelin's  case,  1  Or.  397;  2  Inst.  623  ;  2  Sid.  112  ; 
Vent.  143;  3  Mod.  335  ;  5  Mod.  325;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man,"  C.  See  tit.  "Office" 
(Restoration). 

(r)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (J.),  8  D.  89.  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Highway" 
(Surveyors'  Accounts),  "  Overseers." 

(«)  R.  V.  Haworth,  12  East.  555.     See  ante,  tit.  "  Church"  (Rate). 

{t)  R.  V.  Clear,  7  D.  &  R.  393.f  S.  C.  4  B.  &  C.  899.t  R.  v.  Clapham,  1  Wils. 
305.  R.  V.  Bletshow,  1  Bott.  300.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)  See  tits.  "Act  of 
Parliament,"  "County"  (Accounts). 

(m)  R.  v.  Worcestersh.  (J.),  3  D.  &  R.  299.f  See  R.  v.  Carrocke,  1  Bott.  P.  L. 
299  ;  Show.  295. 

(v)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  1  A.  &  E.  SO.f     See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament."  "  Parish." 

(w)  See  stat.  App. 

\x)  See  stat.  App.  R.  v.  Ld.  Montacute,  1  W.  Blac.  64.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.  See 
tits.  "  Franchise,"  "  Freedom,"  "  Freeman,"  "  Office,"  (Election)  ;  and  see  stat.  6  & 
7  Vict.  c.  89,  App. 


124  tapping's    mandamus. 

if  he  be  improperly  deprived. (y)  Thus,  if  he  be  disfranchised  for  rcfus- 
iug  to  stand  to  the  award  of  two  aldermen  as  to  an  action. (a.) 

.]     Capital ;  Restoration. — So  it  lies  to  restore  to  the  office  of 

capital  citizen. (a) 

P^_--|  *CiTY.]  Sec  tita.  Borov(/h  ;  Corporation  (^Municipal)  ;  Franchise ; 
*-     '  -'    Freedom  ;  Freeman. 

City  Works,  Clerk  of.] — It  lies  for  the  office  of  clerk  or  surveyor  of 
the  city  of  London  works. (^>) 

.]  Restoration. — It  lies  also  to  restore  to  such   office,  it  being  one 

for  life,  with  fees  and  profits,  also  an  ancient  office,  and  one  of  public 
benefit,  the  sworn  duty  being  to  survey  and  view  the  walls  and  gates  of 
the  city,  and  to  employ  men  in  repairing  the  breaches  and  defects  as  often 
as  they  shall  happen,  and  to  cleanse  the  fountain  heads,  and  to  have  the 
custody  of  the  keys  of  all  the  conduits.  He  is  also  sworn  in  to  duly  ex- 
ecute his  office  by  a  particular  oath,  and  he  also  takes  the  oath  to  govern- 
ment.(r) 

Clerk  of  Butchers'  Company.]     See  tit.  Butchers   Compavy. 
Clerk  of  City  Works.]     See  tit.   Citij  Works,  {Clerk  of). 
Clerk  of  the  Crown.]     See  tit.   Secondary  of  Clerk  of  the  Crown. 
Clerk  of  Custos  Brevium.]     See  tit.  Custos  Brevium. 
Clerk  of  Dean  and  Chapter.]     See  tit.  Dean  and  Chapter. 

Clerk   of   the   Fines  in   the  Marches    of  Wales.]     See   tit. 

Marches,  &c. 

Clerk  of  Guardians  of  Poor.]     See  tit.   Guardians  of  Poor. 

(y)  Middleton's  case,  3  Dyer,  332  b.  333,  pi.  28.  Although  it  would  appear  from 
this  report  that  the  case  was  moved  in  the  C.  B.,  yet  the  writ  was  awarded  fronx 
the  Court  of  B.  R.,  per  Dodderidge,  J.,  3  Dyer,  332  n.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  93.  S. 
C.  1  Roll.  173,  224.     Philips  v.  Bury,  4  Mod.  122.     S.  C.  2  T.  R.  355. 

(z)  Middleton's  case,  3  Dyer,  332  b.  333,  pi.  28,  and  cases  there  cited. 

(a)  R.  V.  Carlisle  (Mayor),  Fort.  200. 

(6)  R.  V.  Lee,  1  Show.  252,  citing  Cock's  case,  2  Sid.  112  (which  book,  per  Dol- 
bin,  J.,  "  is  fit  to  be  burned,  being  taken  by  him  when  a  student,  and  unworthily 
done  by  them  that  printed  it:"  per  Somers,  S.  G.)  See  Middleton's  case,  1  Sid. 
169;  5  Com.  Dig.,  Bvo.  edit.  21. 

(c)  Le  Case  del  Clark  de  City  Works  de  Londres,  2  Sid.  112.  This  point  was  not, 
however,  determined  in  this  case,  for  the  Court  not  being  fully  advised  as  to  the 
nature  of  the  office,  left  the  case  to  be  moved  again  ;  but  see  R.  v.  London  (Mayor), 
3  T.  R.  182,  n.(b),  cited  also  in  Mr.  Leigh's  case,  3  Mod.  334,  n.  {(/)  See  R.  v.  Lon- 
don (.Vldcrmen),  2  Barn.  398 ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C,  as  to  the  further  duties  of 
the  office. 


COLLEGE. 

Clerk  of  Justices.]     See  tit.  Justices  ( Clerk). 


125 


Clerk  of  Land  Tax  Commissioners.]    See  tit.  Land   Tax   Com- 
missioners. 

Clerk  of  Masons'  Company.]     Sec  tits.  Masons'  Company;  Com- 
pany (  Clerk). 

Clerk  of  Parish.]     See  tit.  Parish  Clerk. 

*Clerk  OF  Peace.]     See  t\t.  Peace  {Clerk  of).  r*76] 

Clerk  of  Private  Companies.]     See  tit.  Company  {Clerk). 

Clerk  of  Turnpike  Trustees.]     See  tit.  Highway  { Clerk). 

Clerk  of  Vestry.]     See  tit.    Vestry   Clerk. 

Clerk  of  Yill.]     See  tit.  Vill. 

Clerk  of  the  Waters,  London.]  See  tit.  3Iint. 

Clothmakers'  Company.]  See  tits.  Company;  Freedom  (Com- 
pany). 

Colchester  Corporation  Court  of.]  See  tits.  Attorney:  Courts 
Inferior. 

Colchester,  High  Steward  of.]  Swearing  in. — It  lies  to  cora- 
mr.nd  the  swearing  in  of  the  high  steward  of  Colchester,  for  he  is  a  pub- 
lic officer.  (<-/) 

College.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 

College 


College 

Chaplain 

Fellows 

Election  - 
Admission 
Expulsion 

Appeal 
Restoration 

Librarian 

Admission 

Master  -  -  - 
Appointment  - 
Election,  &c.,  or 
Admission 


76 

n 

11 

11 

18 
18 
Id 
19 
19 
79 
79 
79 


Swearing  in     - 

Restoration 
Member 

Admission 
Oaths     -         -         - 
President 
Provost 
Scholarship    - 
Seal        -         -         - 
Vice  Master    - 
Visitor  -         -         - 

Jurisdiction  of 
Deprivation 


79 
79 
79 

79 
80 
80 
80 
80 
80 
80 
80 
80 
81 


(d)  Anon.,    M.    1652;    Sty.    355.      See   tits.    "Stratford-upon-Avon    Stewrad," 
"  Steward." 


126  tapping's    mandamus. 

A  college  is  a  civil  corporation,  of  which,  if  no  visitor  be  specially 
appointed,  the  founder,  and  his  heirs  are  clothed  with  that  office. 

.]      Chaplain. — The  writ  does  not  lie,  cither  to  command  the 

admission  or  restoration  of  a  College  chaplain,  because  he  is  under  the 
dominion  of  the  visitor,(<')  to  whom  an  appeal  must  be  made. 

P  ^-_  -,      .]     *Fclloics,  Election. — The  Court  has  both  granted(/) 

'-  and  refused  the  writ  of  mandamus  to  command  the  visitor  to  deter- 

mine the  disputed  election  of  a  fellow,  (^r) 

.]     Fellows'  Admission. — The  Court  of  B.  E.  will,  it  seems,  grant 

a  mandamus  to  admit  to  a  fellowship  of  a  College,  and  has  often  done 
so.(/t)  Thus  the  stat.  1  Geo.  1,  s.  2,  c.  13,  concerning  the  abjuration 
oaths,  orders  visitors  to  admit  others  in  the  room  of  nonjuring  fellows, 
and  on  a  refusal  to  admit,  the  Court  will,  in  such  a  case,  grant  the  writ,(i) 
and  therefore  the  Court  requires  the  fact  and  jurisdiction  of  the  visitor,  if 
any,  to  be  shewn  on  the  return,  and  will  not  supersede  such  a  writ  on 
motion  and  affidavits;(y)  but  if  by  the  return  it  appear  there  is  a  visitor, 
the  Court  will  not  grant  a  peremptory  mandamus ;  although  formerly  in 
the  case  of  colleges  that  were  of  royal  foundation,  and  no  visitor  was  ap- 
pointed, the  Court  granted  the  writ ;  but  in  the  case  of  private  founda- 
tions, it  was  always  doubted  whether  the  writ  could  be  awarded,  admit- 
ting that  no  visitor  was  appointed  by  the  statutes. (/t)  And  the  peremp- 
tory writ  will  be  denied  where  a  visitor  is  returned,  although  such  return 
does  not  show  that  there  was  a  visitor  at  the  time  of  refusal  to  admit,  &c., 
or  that  his  authority  extended  to  admit  or  refuse  admission  to  fellows. (?) 

.]     Fellows,  Expulsion. — Although  there  is  a  judgment  of  Lord 

IIale,(»i.)  in  which  he  states,  that  the  writ  of  mandamus  is  the  legal 
instrument  whereby  to  remove  fellows  from  their  fellowships,  by  virtue  of 
the  original  jurisdiction  and  authority  which  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has,  to 
enforce  the  execution  of  the  laws,  and  for  the  preservation  of  good  gov- 
ernment; yet  inasmuch  as  we  shall  see,(«)  that  the  Court  has  no  juris- 

(e)  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  Stra.  797.  Prohurst's  case,  Garth.  168;  Andr.  177;  Bac. 
Abr.  tit  "  Man."  C.  2.  R.  v.  St.  Catherine  Hall,  4  T.  R.  233.  See  tits.  "  Chaplain,'' 
"Office"  (Restoration  Return),  "Visitor." 

( f)  R.  V.  Blythe,  Mod.  404 ;  but  this  case  was  never  decided,  5  Mod.  423,  n.  {a). 
S.  C.  5  Mod.  421. 

(^r)  R.  V.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  166,  per  Windham,  J.,  where  it  is  stated  that  there 
were  no  precedents  for  such  a  writ. 

(A)  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  483,  where  see  form  of  writ.  Woolverton's  case,  P.  2  Edw. 
2,  memb— ,  cited  in  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  172.  Bentley  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  Barn.  453. 
R.  V.  St.  Peter's  Coll.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  321,  Q.  B. 

(i)  R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  52;  1  Wils.  266,  S.  C,  and  see  the  stat.  App. 

[j)  R.  V.  W'haley,  T.  13  Geo.  2  ;  Stra.  1139.  S.  C.  7  Mod.  308,  also  cited  in  7 
Mod.  356,  n.  (/) ;  2  Keb.  863.  See  post,  Dr.  Patrick's  case,  1  Lev.  65.  See  tits. 
"  College,"  (Visitor),  infra,  "Visitor." 

[k)  R.  T.  All  Soul's  Coll.,  Sir  T.  Jon.  175,  and  cases  there  cited.  Anon.,  2  Barn. 
437.  Dr.  Bently  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  Barn.  453,  per  Page,  J.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man." 
C.  2. 

[I)  R.  V.  Allsop,  2  Show.  117.  S.  C.  2  Jones,  174.  Dr.  Robert's  case,  per  Dol- 
ben,  J.,  2  Show.  170.  R.  v.  Canterbury,  (Archbp.),  7  Mod.  220.  See  "Visitor," 
infra. 

[m)  Comb.  280.     See  tits.  "  Office,"  (Removal,)  "  University." 

(n)  Infra,  p.  78. 


COLLEGE.  127 

iiction  to  restore  a  fellow  upon  undue  expulsion,  it  seems  that  no  sound 
'eason  can  be  given  why  it  should  be  allowed,  to  expel  one  not  duly 
admitted,  or  unduly  continued  after  a  good  admission ;  indeed,  the  later 
authorities  seem  clearly  to  have  decided,  that  the  Court  of  B.  11.  has  no 
such  jurisdiction. (o) 

*But  the  writ  will  be  granted  to  command  the  Vice-Chancellor,  ^  ,.(.-4,  -, 
or  other  proper  functionary,  to  receive,  hear  and  determine  an 
opjyeal,  upon  the  expulsion  of  a  fellow. (^j) 

.]     Fellow,  Restoration. — Many  of  the  older  cases  shew,  that  the 

Court  of  B.  E..  has  often  granted  the  writ  of  mandamus  to  fellows  of  col- 
leges for  various  purposes,  and  the  books  furnish  many  dicta  that  they, 
qua  fellows,  had  a  locus  standi  as  applicants  for  the  writ. (5')  Thus,  the 
Court  often  assumed  and  exercised  the  jurisdiction  of  commanding,  by 
writ  of  mandamus,  the  restoration  of  a  fellow  unlawfully  deprived,  not- 
withstanding the  existence  of  a  visitor,  and  this  so  early  as  the  reigns  of 
Edw.  2,  and  Edw.  3.(r)  But  the  Judges,  at  an  early  period,  began  to 
doubt  the  correctness  of  those  cases,  which  afl&rmed  this  jurisdiction, (s) 
and  ultimately  overruled  them.(<)  So  that  it  is  now  clearly  established, 
that  the  writ  does  not  lie  to  restore  a  fellow  to  his  fellowship  in  those  cases 
where  there  is  a  visitor  who  has  jurisdiction,  and  to  whom  an  appeal  can 
be  made,  and  before  whom,  and  no  one  else,  the  matter  is  examinable ; 
for  when  a  man  accepts  a  fellowship,  he  does  so  subject  to  the  rules  of  the 
college,  and  the  private  laws  of  the  founder ;  colleges  being  corporations, 
or  foundations  which,  like  Inns  of  Court,(?f)  in  no  way  concern  the  public, 
and  as  they  are  govei-ned  by  the  particular  laws  of  the  founders,  the  Court 
of  B.  R.  cannot  notice  their  private  ordinance,  nor  grant  the  writ  for  the 
purpose  of,  in  any  way  interfering,  (i') 

(o)  R.  V.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Comb.  279.  S.  C.  Holt,  436.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  233,  236. 
8.  C.  Skin.  359,  368,  393,  454,  546.  R.  v.  Dr.  Gower,  3  Salk.  230,  7;  Andr.  183; 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.) ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) 

(p)  Usher's  case,  5  Mod.  452.  R.  v.  Ely,  (Ep.),  1  Blac.  Rep.  58.  S.  C.  1  Wil?. 
266.     See  tits.  "  Courts  Inferior,"  "  Visitor." 

{q)  Per  Glyn,  C.  J.,  in  City  Works  case,  2  Sid.  112.  The  Protector  v.  Craford, 
Styles,  457  ;  50  Edw.  3,  p.  2,  memb.  8.  Woolverton's  case,  cited  in  Patrick's  case, 
Raym.  110;  1  Keb.  834  ;  26  Edw.  3,  per  Hale,  C.  J.  ;  2  Keb.  799,  and  1  Mod.  82. 
Anon.,  Freem.  21,  per  Hale.  R.  v.  Blythe,  5  Mod.  404,  per  Rokeby,  J.;  F.  Corody, 
6  ;  the  very  sending  the  writ  shews  a  right  to  the  jurisdiction  till  the  contrary  be 
shewn;  21  Edw.  1,  C.  B.  Rot.  318;  March.  181;  Patrick's  case,  Raym.  110,  111. 
Dr.  Lewes's  case,  also  there  cited  ;  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  478,  where  see  form  of  writ ;  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.  2. 

(r)  See  previous  note,  and  Dr.  Witherington's  case,  E.  T.,  13  Car.  2  ;  1  Lev.  23. 
S.  C.  1  Keb.  2.     Patrick's  case,  Raym.  110. 

(«)  Appleford's  case,  1  Mod.  82  ;  Raym.  31. 

(t)  3  Mod.  265  ;  1  Lev.  23;  Carth.  92  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  (B.) 

(m)  R.  v.  Gray's  Inn,  Doug.  353. 

(v)  Parkinson's  case.  Comb.  143.  S.C.Holt,  143.  See  Apleford's  case,  supra,  wlio 
was  not  restored,  because  it  appeared  upon  the  return  that  he  was  properly  ex- 
pelled, and  1  Sid.  71,  Dr.  Widrington's  case,  both  there  cited.  Dolben,  J.,  Comb. 
143,  said  that  the  writs  in  Widdrington's  and  Goddard's  case  were  both  obtained 
by  surprise,  although  Ld.  Holt's  MS.  of  those  cases  does  not  so  express  it ;  and  the 
Court  was  so  clear  that  it  had  no  jurisdiction  that  it  would  not  put  the  college  to 
make  a  return.     See  2  Keb.  863,  Widdrington's  case,  Raym.  31  ;  Comb.  143,  444. 


128  tapping's    mandamus. 

r  *-o  1  ^Neither  will  the  writ  be  granted  for  the  profit  or  privileges  of 
^  a  fellowship  only,  if  the  prosecutor  be  not  removed  from  his 
place ;(((')  because  he  has  a  remedy  by  action. (x) 

.]     Librarian,  Admission. — The  writ  will  be  granted  to  command 

the  admission  of  a  college  librarian,  appointed  by  the  person  in  whom 
such  power  is  vested  by  the  college  statutes. (,y) 

.]      Master. — So  the  writ  lies  for  a  master  of  a  college,  if  there  be 

no  visitor. (;.) 

■]  Appointment. — So  it  has  been  granted  to  command  the  ap- 
pointment of  one  of  several  persons  nominated  to  the  mastership  of  a 
college,  where  the  duty  of  appointing  is  ministerial  merely,  and  not  visit- 
atorial.(f/) 

.]  Election  or  Admission — But  it  has  been  held  that  a  manda- 
mus docs  not  go  to  elect  or  admit  to  such  an  ofl&ce,  the  remedy  being  by 
appeal  to  the  visitor,  and  also  because  such  master  may  have  an  action  oa 
the  case,  for  not  admitting  him.(/y) 

.]     Swearimj  in. — It  has,  however,  been  held,  that  the  writ  lies 

to  command  the  swearing  in  of  one  elected  master  of  a  college,  but  there 
did  not  appear  to  be  a  visitor  for  the  purposes  of  the  master,  and  the  rule 
was  made  absolute,  no  cause  being  shown. (t) 

.]     Restoration. — A  mandamus  does  not  lie  to  a  college  where 

there  is  a  visitor;  so  that  it  lies  not  in  such  a  case  to  restore  to  the  mas- 
tership of  a  college  ;(</)  for  if  the  master  of  a  college  be  wrongly  ousted, 

S.  C.  Garth.  92  (and  Ailoff's  and  Dr.  Robert's  case  there  cited).  S.  C.  1  Show.  V4, 
and  74.  u.  (6)  (c).  S.  C.  3  Mod.  265.  S.  C.  Holt,  143.  Philips  v.  Bury,  454.  S. 
C.  4  Mod.  112,  124.  S.  C.  2  T.  R.  346.  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Mod.  236 ;  Andr. 
177.  See  St.  John's  Coll.  v.  Toddington,  Burr.  19.5.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  71.  R.  v. 
Dr.  Windham,  Cowp.  378.  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  22.  Brideoak's  case 
cited  in  1  W.  Blac.  25.  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  2  T.  R.  290.  R.  v.  Catherine  Hall,  &c.,  4 
T.  R.  233,  241,  et  notis.  R.  v.  Alsop,  2  Show.  170.  See  also  Dr.  Goddard's  case, 
1  Lev.  19.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  29.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  75,  84.  Dr.  Robert's  case,  2  Keb.  102, 
864 ;  and  Dr.  .Merrit's  case,  where  like  writs  to  the  College  of  Physicians  were  denied. 
Widdrington's  case,  Roy.  31,  68.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  71.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  23.  S.  C.  1  Keb. 
2,  50,  61,  79,  131,  150,  234,  458  ;  Jones,  174,  175,  accord.,  per  Wyndham,  J.,  in  R. 
V.  New  Waterworks,  1  Lev.  123;  and  see  Patrick's  case,  1  Lev.  65.  S.  C.  Raym. 
101.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  65.  See  R.  v.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233,  11,  14.  Clare's  case,  1  Keb. 
14.  Kenn's  case,  Co.  7,  44;  13  Ass.  2  ;  8  Ass.  8  Edw.  3.  R.  v.  New  Coll.,  2  Lev. 
14.  S.  C.  1  Mod.  82,  nom.  Apleford's  case.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  799,  8G1 ;  Raym.  112  ; 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  (B.) 

(w)  Dr.  Goddard's  case,  1  Keb.  '".'>,  84,  per  Twisden,  J.,  which  was  recognised  in 
R.  v.  Middleton,  1  Keb.  625.     See  lit.  "  Office-Suspension." 

{x)  Ante,  p.  18,  20. 

{y)  Canterbury  (Archbp.)  v.  Trinity  Coll.,  1  Barn.  194. 

(z)  Patricks  case,  Ray.  101,  and  cases  there  cited.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.) 
See  tit.  "  School,"  "  Visitor." 

[a)  R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  2  T.  R.  290.  See  Philips  v.  Bury,  2  T.  R.  346.  But  seetits. 
"Office,"  "  Visitor." 

(i)  Patrick's  case,  2  Keb.  167,  per  Twisden,  J.  See  tit.  "Visitor."  Ante, -p. 
20. 

(c)  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  Barn.  52.  See  Patrick's  case,  2  Keb.  167,  per  Twis- 
den, J. 

(</)  Dr.  Patrick's  case,  1  Lev.  65.  S.  C.  Raym.  101.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  346.  S.C.I 
Keb.  289  (where  it  is  said  Dr.  Withrington's  case  slionld  not  have  been  granted), 
294,  298,  551,  610.  665.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  167,  per  Twisden,  J.  Dr.  Widdrington's 
case,  1  Lev.  23.     R.  v.  New  Coll.,  2  Lev.  14.     See  tit.  "  Visitor." 


COLLEGE.  120 

an  assize  will  Ho ;  Tout  not  if  he  be  ousted  by  Lis  proper  ordinary  or 
visitor,  (e) 

.]  Memher,  Admission. — So  a  mandamus  will  not  lie  to  com- 
mand the  heads  of  a  college  to  admit  a  member,  unless  he  have  an  in- 
choate right  to  be  entered. (/) 

.]     "^^  Oaths. — Tlie  C)ourt  has  granted  the  writ  to  command  r  :;:qrv  n 

the  master  of  the  college  to  take  the  oaths  of  the  fellows,  as  pre-  '- 
scribed  by  stat.  1  W.  &  M.  c.  S.(ff)     As  to  granting  the  writ,  on  a  re- 
fusal to  take  the  oaths,  pursuant  to  stat.   1   Geo.  1,  c.  2,  s.  13;  sec 
that  stat.  Appendix. 

.]     President. — It  docs  not  lie  to  command  the  senior  fellow  of  a 

college  to  be  president  thereof,  if  there  be  a  visitor. (/a) 

.]     Provost. — See  titles  Eton   Colic j e  ;  Prebendary  ;  Provost  of 

Coller/e. 

.]     iScholarsJup. — It  lies  to  command  the  president  of  a  college 

to  admit  a  person  chosen  to  a  scholarship ;  for  such  person  being  but  a 
nominee,  and  therefore  not  on  the  foundation,  is  not  until  admission, 
under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  visitor. (/)  But  if  it  be  doubtful  whether 
the  visitor  have  power  to  refuse,  the  Court  will  grant  the  writ  and  order 
the  statutes  to  be  returned. (7) 

.]     /Seal. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  provost  of  a  college  to 

afl&x  the  college  seal  to  a  presentation  by  the  college,  it  being  a  purely 
ministerial  act.(7i-)  So  it  has  been  granted  to  command  the  warden  of  a 
college  to  affix  the  common  seal  of  the  college  to  an  answer  of  the  fel- 
lows, &c.,  in  Chancery,  contrary  to  his  own  separate  answer  put  in. (J) 

.]      Vice  blaster. — A  mandamus  to   deprive  the  Vice  Master,  as 

general  visitor  of  a  college,  has  been  refused.  («i) 

[e)  Canon's  ca?e,  Dyer.  Dr.  Widdrington's  case,  1  Lev.  23.  The  writ  of  assize 
is  an  obsolete  remedy,  see  a7ite,  p.  19. 

(/)  R.  V.  Lincoln's  Inn,  7  D.  &  R.  368,f  per  Littledale,  J.  See  tits.  "Inn  of 
Court,"  (Admission),  "Scholarship,"  "University"  (Member,  Scholar).  Ante,  pp. 
27.  28. 

(g)  R.  V.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Mod.  233,  &c.,  supra.  See  tit.  "  College"  (Master). 
See  tit.  "Office"  (I'estor.ition,  T^eturn,  Oaths). 

(A)  R.  V.  St.  Catharine  Hall,  4  T.  R.  235.  Patrick's  case,  Raym.  101.  S.  0.  1 
Lev.  65.  S.  0.  2  Kcb.  (J5,  &c.  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  472,  where  see  form  of  writ.  See 
tit.  "  Visitor." 

(i)  R.  V.  St.  John's  Coll.  &c.,  4  Mod.  2G0.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  368,  369,  n.  (b).  S.  0. 
Comb.  238.  S.  C.  Holt,  436,  437;  2  T.  R.  290,  6;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Visitor,"  (A. 
16),  et  scq.     See  supra,  "Member,"  (Admission),  and  post,  tit.  "  Visitor." 

(./)  Note  («),  supra.     See  tit.  "College,"  (Visitor),  infra. 

(k)  R.  V.  Dr.  Bland,  7  Mod.  355,  Lee,  C.  J.,  saying,  he  saw  no  difference  between 
this  and  the  Salisbury  (Ep.)  case.  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  1265.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac. 
352.  See  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  Burr.  1663,  per  Asliton,  J.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.), 
1  W.  Blac.  547.  S.  C.  Burr.  1647.  See  R.  v.  Dr.  Windham,  Cowp.  377.  R.  v. 
Surrey  (J.),  2  Show.  74,  n.  (d),  3rd  edit.,  and  see  1  W.  Blac.  551.  S.  C.  Burr. 
1647.    See  tits.  "  Corporation  Municipal,"  "  Hospital,"  (Seal), "  Seal,"  "  University." 

{I)  R.  V.  Dr.  Windham,  Cowp.  377.  Case  of  L.  H.  Steward  of  Cambridge,  1  W. 
Blac.  547.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (11.).  Burr.  1663,  per  Aston,  J.,  and  see  7  Mod.  356, 
R.  V.  Dr.  Bland.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.) ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.) 

(m)  R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  Andr.  176;  1  W.  Blac.  54.  S.C.I  Wils.  266.  See  tils. 
"Office,"  (Deprivation,)  "Visitor." 

April,  1852— 9 


130  tapping's     5IANDAMUS. 

.]      ViKi'lo)- ;  Jar  indict  ion. — Although  the  Court  has  often   stated 


that  it  -will  in  cases  of  coUegc.«,  grant  the  writ  in  the  first  instance,  and 
upon  tlie  return  decide  whether  it  has  jurisdictiun  or  not,(?i)  yet  such 
dicta  are  merely  applicable  to  cases  in  which  the  existence  or  not  of  ;i 
visitor  has  been  left  in  doubt  upon  the  argument  of  the  rule  ;(o)  for  if 
J.  ^o-i  -1  the  affidavits  of  the  prosecutor  '''admit  the  existence  of  a  visitor,  or 
such  a  fact  be  alleged  by  the  defendant  and  be  uncontradicted 
by  the  other  side,  the  Court  will  in  its  discretion  refuse  to  make  the  rule 
absolute,  (j)) 

As  to  deprivation  of  Visitor,  see  supra  (  Vice  Master),  ante,  p.  80. 

Commissioner.]  Election,  tC-. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to  certify 
the  election  of  a  commissioner  appointed  under  a  local  or  other  act  of 
Parliament,  and  to  command  a  proper  meeting  to  be  holden  to  swear  him 
to  the  duties  of  his  office;  but  not  if  the  office  be  one  which  may  be  suIj- 
ject  to  an  information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  u-arrantOj  and  the  election 
be  disputable. (9) 

The  Court  of  B.  R.  has  also  power  to  send  a  writ  of  mandamus  to  per- 
sons acting  u.uder  a  commission,  to  know  for  what  cause  a  deprivation,  kc. 
was  made  and  notwitstanding  the  commission  be  de(ermiucd.(/') 

Commissions.]    8ee  tit.  Militia. 

Common  Burgess.]     See  tits.  Bnnjcss  (^Common) ;   Office. 

Common  Councilman.]     See  tits.  Councillor ;   Office. 

(Commoner.]  Election. — As  to  the  election,  &C.  of  a  commoner,  sec 
Stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89. (s) 

.]     Admission. — It  lies  to  admit  to  the  office   of  commoner  of  a 

borough  but  not  unless  the  prosecutor  can  shew  that  he  has  a  perfect  right 
to  such  admission. (/) 

.]     Restoration. — It  lies  also  to  command  a  municipal  corporation 

to  restore  one  to  the  office  of  commoner  of  a  borough,  if  duly  entitlcd.('i) 

Common  Pleas  Court.]     See  tit.  Courts  (Superior). 

(«)  R.  V.  New  Coll.  &c.,  2  Lev.  !•;.     ^^polmau's   Gloss.  V.  Visitor,  ciicfl   in    \\.\. 
>»atrick,  1  Keb.  834;  llaym.  101,  lo2,  loJ. 
(o)  See  tit.  "  Visitor." 
(p)  10  Mod.  55,  per  Eyre.  J. :  .':  A.  k  E.  2S:>.f 


iq)  R.  T.  Beedle,  3  A.  &  E.  4(J7,t  where  sec  direction  of  writ.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Miiy- 
or),  6  A.  &  E.  351,  352.t  R.  v.  Kelk,  15  A.  &  E.  559.f  And  see  tits.  '-Aet  "of 
I'lvrliament,"  "Compensation,"  (Company),  '•  L)raina«-e,''  -Office."  (Election.) 

(;•)  R.  V.  Prin,  009,  G86.  (.s)  Appendix. 

(^)  R.  V.  Malmesbury,  (High  Steward),  4  Jur.  222.  See  tit.  "Office,"'  (Admis- 
sion). 

(u)  Emery  v.  Malraesbury  (Aldermen),  3  Q.  B.  577.f  S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  482.  See 
tits.  "  Burgess,"  "  Franchise,"  "  Freedom,"  "  Freeman,"  '•  Office,"  (Restoration). 


COMPANY.  i:]l 

*CoMPANY.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows: —  [*82] 

CoMrAW. 

Registration 

(Compensation 

Directors        -         _         _ 

Swearing  in     - 

Duties,  &c. 
Shares  .        .        . 

.]     Joint  Stock,  Reg isf ration. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command 


Company — falls 

-    8a 

82 

Execution 

-     8;; 

82 

Books,  &c.,  Int^pcction,  &c 

of-     83 

82 

Dcliverj-,  &c. 

-      83 

82 

Clerk  of 

-     84 

82 

Restoration 

-     84 

82 

Direction  of  Writ  to 

-     84 

the  registrar  of  Joint  Stock  Companies,  under  stat.  7  &  8  Vict.  c.  110, 
to  return  a  change  of  the  name  of  a  company',  after  complete  registra- 
tion, (v) 

.]      Compensation. — See  tit.  Compenmiion. 

.]    Directors,  Sivearing  in. — The  writ  will  be  granted  to  command 

the  swearing  in  of  a  director  of  a  chartered  companj'.f?'-) 

.]     Duties,  <(r. — A  company,  though  in  thc^^naturc   of  a  private 

body  of  undertakers,  is  compellable  by  mandamus  to  do  what  its  public 
duty  and  general  interests  require,  and  that  has  been  held  even  in  a 
case  where  the  prosecutor  might  have  proceeded  by  indictment,  the  Court 
saying,  that  the  remedy  by  mandamus  is  never  more  beneficial  than  when 
enforcing  the  performance  of  a  duty.(.e)  So  it  will  lie  to  command  a 
company,  which  has  power  under  certain  circumstances  to  elect  whether 
or  not  it  will  do  a  certain  act,  to  perform  such  act  after  it  has  elected  to 
do  it.(.c) 

But  the  Court  of  B.  E.  will  not  interfere  with  the  mere  private  trans- 
actions of  a  company.  Thus  a  mandamus  to  the  London  Insurance  Com- 
pany to  permit  a  transfer  of  stock  to  be  made  in  their  books  was  refused, 
because  the  company,  although  incorporated  by  charter,  was  a  mere  pri- 
vate partnership,  and  that  a  mandamus  being  a  high  prerogative  writ,  is 
confined  to  cases  of  a  public  nature. (,y) 

.]     Shares. — Nor  does  it  lie  to  command  the  transfer  of  shares  in 

a  public  company,  standing  in  the  name  of  a  bankrupt,  into  the  names  of 
his  assignees ;  the  Court  in  giving  judgment,  holding  that  it  was  not  a 
case  in  which  the  Court  would  interfere  by  mandamus,  and  that  though 
perhaps  several  exceptions  to  the  contrary  might  be  found,  yet  the  writ 
of  mandamus  was  confined  in  principle  to  cases  where  the  matter  was  of 
{)ublic  and  general  importance,  and  not  to  cases  of  mere  private  right, 
especially  where  there  is  another  remedy  either  by  action  or  suit  in  equity : 
and  that  the  Court  had  refused  in  a  similar,  though  much  stronger,  case 
to  grant  a  mandamus. (i) 

{v)  In  re  Sheffield  Insurance  Company,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  Q.  B.  407. 

{iv)  See  tits.  "Amicable  Assurance  Company,"  "  Office,"  (Swearing  in) ;  Str.  6;t(' ; 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.) 

(a;)  R.  V.  Severn  Railway,  2  B.  &  Aid.  G4G.  R.  v.  Wilts  Canal,  3  A.  &  E.  482.1 
S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  344.f 

( y)  R.  v.  London  Insurance  Company,  5  B.  &  Aid.  899,f  cited  in  R.  v.  Wiltshire 
Canal,  5  N.  &  M.  Ml.\    S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  483.f     See  also  tit.  "  Bank  of  England." 

{z)  Ante,  p.  18,   22.     R.  v.  Amicable  Assurance,  Stra.  C96.  where  the  Court 


132  T  A  P  P  I  N  Ci '  S     M  A  N  D  A  M  U  S. 

=^]>ut  the  Court  will  eoniniand  the  company  to  enter  upon  it.? 
L  ""*-^  books  the  probate  of  a  dccea.sed  shareholder,  leaving  any  question 
as  to  the  validity  and  effect  of  the  probate,  to  be  raised  by  the  return. (cr) 

.]      C((l/s,  Pa/ymcnt. — Where  the   directors    of    an    incorporated 

company  authorized  to  make  calls  on  the  shareholders,  had  made  calls 
which  had  not  been  paid,  and  the  original  directors  had  all  ceased  to  be 
SO;  and  no  new  directors  had  been  appointed,  the  Court  refused  a  manda- 
mus to  command  the  company  to  enforce  the  payment  of  the  calls  that 
had  been  made.(/v). 

.]  Execution. — Where  an  act  of  Parliament  incorporating  a  com- 
pany, directs  that  actions  in  respect  of  claims  upon  the  company  shall  be 
brought  against  the  treasurer,  but  that  his  effects  shall  not  be  taken  in 
execution,  a  mandamus  will  issue  to  the  directors,  &c.  of  the  company, 
commanding  them  to  pay  the  money  recovered  in  such  action. (t)  So  if 
it  be  clearly  established  that  such  directors  are  evading  the  payment  of 
its  debts  and  the  due  satisfaction  of  judgments  recovered  agaimst  it,  on 
the  ground  that  they  have  no  corporate  assets  actually  in  possession,  the 
Court  of  B.  R.  would  not  perhaps  be  going  beyond  the  principle  which 
regulates  its  extraordinary  interposition  by  mandamus,  if  it  compel  them 
to  exercise  that  power  with  which  the  Legi.slature  has  trusted  thtm  for 
this  purpose,  in  order  to  put  themselves  in  funds  to  answer  the  demands 
of  their  creditors. ((/) 

.]     Boohs,  Accounts,  dc;   Inspection,  Delivery,  &c. — It  lies    to 

command  a  company  to  allow  a  proprietor  to  inspect  all  books,  accounts, 

papers,  and  writings  belonging  to  the  company,  and  kept  in  pursuance  of 

their  act  or  charter,  &e.,  and  to  take  copies  thereof  or  extracts  therefrom, 

such  right  being  conferred  on  the  proprietors  by  such  act,  &c.  ;(e)  but  if 

no  Parliamentary  direction  on  the  subject  be  shewn,  the  Court  will  refuse 

the  writ.(/)     A  special  reason  for  desiring  to  see  the  accounts  must  in 

some  cases  be  stated,  as  where  there  is  only  a  right  of  limited  inspection, 

r*<5ll    ^°^^  ^^  necessary,  it  must  be  shewn  that  when  demand  of  inspection 

was  made,  the  object  for  *which  it  was  wanted  was  stated,  for  before 

granted  a  mandamus  to  that  Society  to  swear  in  a  director.  R.  v.  England  (Bank) 
2  B.  &  A.  620.f  R.  V.  London  Assurance,  1  D.  &  R.  olO.f  S.  C.  5  B.  &  A.  899. f 
See  tits.  "  Bank  of  England."  "Corporation,"  (Trading). 

(a)  R.  V.  Worcester  Canal,  1  M.  &  R.  529.  See  post,  tit.  "Return." 

(6)  R.  V.  Victoria  Park,  4  P.  &  I).  639.  8.  C.  1  Q.  B.  288,  293,t  and  note  (5), 
ibid,  this  case  being  distinguishable  from  that  of  St.  Kiitherine's  Dock,  4  B.  &  Ad. 
nCO.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  121.f  R.  V.  Nottingham  Old  ^Yorks,  6  A.  &  E.  335.f  S.  C.  1 
N.  k  P.  480.f  See  the  judgment  of  Patteson,  J.,  6  A.  &  E.  3G9,  STO.f  R.  v.  Market 
Strett  Commissioners,  4  B.  k  Ad.  333  n.(rt).f  Corpe  v.  Glyn,  3  B.  &  Ad.  801,t  See 
infra  "Execution,"  and  ante,  p.  16. 

(c)  Ante,  p.  23,  24.  R.  v.  St  Katherinc's  Dock,  1  X.  &  M.  121.f  S.  C.  4  B.  &  Ad. 
360.f  Wormwell  v.  Hailstone,  6  Bing.  676. 

{d)  R.  V.  Victoria  Park,  4  P.  &  D.  463.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  292.f  See  tits.  "Compen- 
sation," (Office,  Payment),  "Money." 

(e)  R.  V.  Wiltshire  Canal,  5  N.  k  M.  344.f  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  483.f  R.  v.  London 
Insurance,  5  13.  &  Aid.  899. f  See  tits.  "Books,  &c.,"  "Corporation  Municipal," 
(Books,  &c.)  "  County,"  (Accounts),  "Manor,"  (Court  Rolls  Inspection.) 

(/)  R.v.  Bank  of  England,  2  B.  &  Aid.  620.  R.  \.  Clear,  7  D.  &  R.  395.f  S.  C.  4 
B.  &  C.  899.-J-  Sec  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "Bank  of  England." 


COMPANY. 


183 


the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  allow  such  a  mandamus  to  issue,  the  motive  of  the  party 
desiring  inspection,  &c.  must  a^jpcar,  in  order  that  the  Court  may  see  that 
the  motive  is  a  proper  one.(y)  It  is,  however,  sufficient  to  shew  that 
legal  proceedings  are  bona  fide  contemplated. (/') 

There  must  be  a  demand  and  refusal  previously  to  the  application  for 
the  writ.(i) 

It  is  a  rule  as  to  mandamus  f<u- the  inspection,  &c.  of  documents,  that  it  lies 
only  to  inspect  those  wliich  arc  kept  for  the  use  of  a  body  of  persons  of  whom 
the  applicant  is  one.(y)  Thus  where  parties  hold  books,  &c.  as  trustees  tlic 
Court  will  grant  inspection  to  persons  interested,  and  that  without  any 
specific  reason  assigned. (/i-) 

It  lies  also  to  command  the  ex-clerk  of  a  company  to  deliver  the  com- 
pany's books  to  his  successor. (/) 

.]     Clerk  of  Private.  Restoration. — The  writ  has  been  refused 

to  command  restoration  to  the  place  of  clerk  of  a  company,  as  of  the  Com- 
pany of  Butchers  in  London,  although  it  be  an  office  instituted  by  charter 
and  a  freehold,  for  it  is  not  a  public  office(»i)  but  a  private  one,  for  which 
a  mandaDius  does  not  lie ;  and  although  the  clerk  have  a  freehold  in  such 
office,  for  he  may  have  an  assize  or  an  action  on  the  case.(?!) 

From  a  review,  however,  of  the  older  cases,  it  would  seem  that  the 
mandamus  shoiild  have  been  granted,  for  it  has  been  said  that  the  writ 
has  been  granted  for  clerks  of  private  companies  since  Lord  Holt's  time.(r/) 
So  in  White's  case,  supra,  it  is  stated(^)  that  the  mandamus  was  granted, 
the  Court  there  alleging  as  the  ground  of  its  judgment,  that  it  was  the 
same  case  with  that  of  a  town  clerk. (  q) 

A  mandamus  ^^canuot  be  directed  to  the  clerk  of  a  private  company, 
being  too  inferior  an  officer. (?•) 

ig)  R.  V.  Clear,  ^T  D.  &  R.  393.f  S.  C.  4  B.  &  C.  899  ■\  5  N.  k  M.  SSl.f  S.  C.  3 
A.&E.  483,f  supra.  See  post,  tit.  "Application,"  (Demand  and  Refusal).  Ante 
p.  16. 

(A)  R.  V.  Tower  Hamlets,  3  G.  &;  D.  95.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  GVO,f  citing  R.  v.  Tower,  4 
M.  &  S.  lG2.f  ^ 

[i )  See  tit.  "Application,"  (Demand  and  Refusal),  and  see  T  D.  &R.  393.f  S.  (.. 
4  B.  &  C.  899,f  as  to  its  form. 

(y)  R.  V.  Westovcr  (Overseers).  1  N.  &  P.  222.f  S.  C.  5  A.&E.  T86.f  Southamp- 
ton (Mayor)  v.  Graves,  8  T.  R.  590.  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  2  M.  &  R.  127.  S.  C.  8  B.  &  C- 

112.+ 

ik)  3  A.  &  E.  482.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  344.  See  tit.  "  Books,  &c." 

[l]  R.  V.  Wildman,  Stra.  879;  1  Barn.  402,  405,  406.  See  3  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man.^' 
A.  ;  S.  C.  R.  V.  AVbeeler,  Gas.  t.  Hard.  99.  S.  C.  Cunn.  Rep.  155.  R.  v.  Ingram,  1  W. 
Blac.  50;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A),  See  tits.  "Blacksmiths'  Company,"  "Book.s, 
Records,  &;c.."  "Town  Clerk,"  (Rolls,  &c). 

(m)  White's  esse,  6  Mod.  18,  S.  C.  3  Salk.  232.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1004.  R.  v.  Lon- 
don (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  177,  182,  n.  (Ij).   See  tits.  "  Butchers'  Company,"  "Office." 

in)  Ante,  p.  18,  19. 

(o)  R.  V.  London  (Aldermen),  2  Barn.  398  ;  Fitz.  Nat.  Brev.  218. 

\p)  White's  case,  Ld.  Raym.  1004. 

\q)    See  Audlcy's  case,  Poph.  176. 

\r)  R.  V.  Wiltshire  Canal,  5  N.  &  M.  349,t  per  Littledale,  J.,  citing  R.  v.  Jeyc8,  5 
3S[,  &  M.  lOl.f  See  tit.  "Office."  (Ministerial  Inferior). 


134  tapping's    mandamus. 

[  *85  ]    *CompJ':nsation.]     This  subject  ia  arranged  as  follows : — 


CoMPKXSATIOS. 

COMI'KXHATION. 

Company        .         -         - 

-     85 

Office     - 

Assessing; 

-     85 

Asscssin 

JuilKincnt 

-     8G 

Bond 

riiynieut 

-     8G 

Payment 

Costs      -         -         - 

-    m 

Rioters 

Application 

-     87 

Sheriffs 

Aflidavits 

-     87 

"1         f'nnimtrt^i  Tf.    1 

«?  friearh 

r  settled,  tliat  wli 

87 
87 
88 
88 
88 
89 


1,'ompany  are  empowered  to  take,  and  do  take  lands  iu  pursuance  of  their 
act,  &c.,  they  can,  after  an  election  so  to  take,  be  obliged  by  mandamus 
to  proceed  to  a  due  valuation  of  them.(.s)  Thus  it  lies  to  command  com- 
missioners acting  under  stat.  35  Geo.  3,  c.  106,  to  hear,  report,  and  adju- 
dicate upon  a  complaint,  and  claim  for  compensationunder  such  statute. (^) 
So  it  lies  to  command  a  magistrate  to  hear  a  complaint  against  a  company, 
for  having  taken  possession  of  certain  land,  and  to  have  the  amount  of 
compensation  settled  according  to  the  terms  of  their  act.(«) 

.]     Asseasing. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  a  railway  or  other 

company,  incorporated  by  act  of  Parliament,  to  issue  a  warrant  or  other 
statutory  process,  and  summon  a  jury  for  the  purpose  of  assessing  com- 
pensation or  damage  incurred  in  pursuance  of  its  act.(i')  So  it  lies  to 
command  the  sheriff  to  execute  the  warrant  or  precept,  and  impanel  the 
compensation  jury;(if)  but  where  an  inc|uisition  has  been  duly  taken,  the 

{s)  R.  T.  Stainfortb  Canal,  1  51.  &  S.  33.  R.  v.  Harbam  Roads,  4  Jur.  50.  Seo 
tits.  '-Act  of  Parliament,"  "Canal  Company,"  "Company,"  "Drainage,"  "  Rail- 
ivav." 

(t)  R.  T.  Thames  Commissioners,  8  A.  &  E.  OOl.f  Sec  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,  ' 
"  Commissioner." 

(u)  R.  V.  Bingham,  4  Q.  B.  877.t     See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions,"  (Justices). 

Iv)  R.  V.  Stainforth  Canal,  1  M.  &  S.  33.  R.  x.  Bagshaw,  7  T.  R.  363.  Re 
Palmer,  9  A.  &  E.  4G3.t  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  492.  R.  v.  Bristol  Dock,  12  East,  429. 
R  V  Nene  Outfall,  9  B.  &  C.  875.1  R.  v.  Liverpool  Railway,  6  N.  &  M.  ISG.f  S. 
C  4  A.  &  E.  650.t  R.  v.  London  Dock,  G  X.  &  M.  390.t  S.  C.  5  A.  &  E.  163.t  R- 
T.  London  Railway,  2  P.  &  D.  243.  S.  C.  10  A.  &  E.  3.1  Es  parte  Farlow,  2  B. 
k  Ad.  341,  348.t  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  1  G.  &  D.  589.t  S.  C.  2  Q.  B. 
■!47  t  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  GG,  Q.  B.  R.  t.  London  Railway,  2  G.  &  D.  444.  S. 
C.  3  Q.  B.  IGG.f  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  187,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Leeds  Railway,  5  N.  &  M. 
246.1  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  683-1  Ex  parte  Parkes.  9  D.  G14;  5  Jur.  435  ;  1  Wol.  P.  C. 
158.  R.  T.  Nottingham  AYaterworks,  5  N.  k  M.  498.t  R.  t.  Ilungerfortl  Market. 
'>  N  &  M  340.t  S.  C.  1  A.  k  E.  668.t  Re  London  Railway.  4  X.  k  M.  458.f  S. 
C  2  \  &  E.  678-1  R.  V.  ilungerford  Market,  4  B.  &  Ad.  327.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M. 
112  -f  4  B.  &  Ad.  592.t  S.  C.  1  X.  &  M.  406.1  4  B.  &  Ad.  596.t  S.  C.  1  N.  & 
M-  548  ;t  3  X.  &  M.  G22.f  S.  C.  1  A.  &  E.  676,t  R.  v.  Market  Street  Commis- 
sioners', 4  B.  &  Ad.  333,t  n.  («).  R.  v.  Northern  Railway,  8  D.  329.  S.  C.  9  L.  J., 
X.  S.  53,  Q.  B.  R.  V.  Wilts  Canal,  8  D.  623  ;  and  see  R.  v.  The  Eastern  Counties 
Uailwav  2  D.,  N.  S.  948,  as  to  second  hearing  and  trial.  R.  t.  Birmingham  CanaL 
4  Jur.  318.  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  5  Jur.  365.  R.  v.  Xortb  Midland 
Railway,  2  Rail.  Cas.  1.  R.  v.  East  Lancashire  Railway,  16  L.  J.,  X.  S.  127,  Q.  B. 
Ex  parte  Revnal,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  304.  Q.  B. 

(vA  R.  V.  Middlesex  (Sheriff,)  3  G.  &  D.  549.  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  Q.  B.  14.  R. 
C-  nom.  Walker  v.  London  Railway,  3  Q.  B.  549,  744.t  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  365  f  S.  C. 
12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  88.  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  12  L.  J..  X.  S.  271,  Q. 
IL    See  tit.  "Sheriff." 


COMPENSATION.  135 

Court  of  B.  11.  '''vvlll  not  grant  a  new  precept  on  the  ground  of  j.  ^q^  -, 
misdirection,  or  the  improper  rejection  of  evidence,  or  that  tlie 
verdict  was  against  evidence,  and  the  damages  grossly  insufficient. (x) 

.]     Jmhjment. — It  lies  also,  to  command  the  entering  up  by  the 

])ropcr  officer,  of  judgment,  for  the  compensation  money  awarded, (3/)  hut 
not  otherwise,  that  in  tlic  terms  in  which  the  verdict  was  given  by  the 
jury,  even  although  it  appear  by  affidavit,  that  in  considering  the  amount  • 
of  damages,  to  be  assessed  by  them,  they  took  into  consideration  matters 
not  properly  within  their  jurisdiction,(.-.)  and  notwithstanding  it  appear 
upon  the  fiice  of  the  proceedings  that  the  jury  assessed  separate  damages, 
in  respect  of  matters  foreign  to  their  jurisdiction,  and  although  such  find- 
ing be  a  nullity,  and  cannot  be  enforced. 

.]     Fai/ment  of. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  payment  of 

such  compensation,  when  assessed  in  those  cases  where  an  action  lies,  as 
where  it  arises  upon  a  statutory  obligation.(f^)  So  where  a  power  to  dis- 
train exists,(o)  the  writ  will  be  refused. (/v) 

]jut  in  all  those  cases  in  which  there  does  not  exist  a  specific  legal 
remedy,  whereby  payment  of  the  compensation  maj'  be  enforced,  the  writ 
of  mandamus  lies  to  command  it,(c)  or  to  enforce  generally  the  inquisition 
of  the  compensation  jury,  or  other  instrument  by  which  it  is  awarded ;((/) 
but  not  the  costs  of  the  inquisition,  or  of  title,  unless  specially  ascer- 
tained, (e) 

.]     Costs. — So  if  the  company  refuse  to  pay  the  compensation 

awarded,  or  the  costs;  a  mandamus  will  be  granted  to  compel  them  so  to 
do,  although  the  statute  make  the  verdict  and  judgments  records  of  the 
Quarter  Sessions. (/) 

It  also  lies  to  command  a  coroner  to  review  his  taxation  of  a  bill  of 
costs,  *in  respect  of  an  inquisition  taken  before  him  for  assessing  ^  ^^g-.  -, 
compensation  under  a  Hallway  Act.(y) 

(x)  R.  V.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  2  D.,  N.  S.  945.  S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  2Tl, 
Q.  15.  citing  R.  v.  Sheffield  Railway,  11  A.  &  E.  194.1  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  111.  See 
lits.  "Courts  Inferior,"  (Relieariug,  &c.),  "  Quarter  Sessions,"  (Rehearing,  &c.) 

()/)  Amhurst's  case,  Ray.  214.  S.  C.  1  Vent.  187.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  8*71.  See  tits. 
"  Courts  Inferior,"  (Judgment),  "  Judgment,"  "  Quarter  Sessions." 

(z)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  Nev.  &  M.  802.f     See  tit.  "Judgment." 

(fl)  Ante,  p.  20.  R.  v.  Hull  Railway,  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  257,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  8  Jur. 
491.     S.  C.  6  Q.  B.  TO.f 

{b)  Ante,  p.  21,  22.  R.  t.  London  Railway,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  42,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  3  D. 
&  L.  309.     See  tit.  "  Distress." 

(r)  R.  V.  Thames,  5  A.  &  E.  804,f  where  see  form  of  writ;  6  A.  &  E.  355,  SCr.f 
S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  480,t  supra.  R.  v.  Swansea  Harbour,  1  P.  &  D.  512.  S.  C.  8  A. 
&  E.  439.f  R.  V.  Great  Western  Railway,  1  D.  &  M.  471.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  597-1  R- 
V.  Deptford  Pier,  3  A.  &  E.  OlO.f     See  tit.  "  Company,"  (Execution),  ante,  p.  18. 

(d)  1  P.  &  1).  512.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  439,f  supra,  and  see  8  A.  &  E.  910,f  supra, 
and  see  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  N.  &  M.  802.f 

(e)  R.  V.  London  Railway,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  42,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  3  D.  &  L.  399.  See 
tit.  "  Costs,"  and  infra  (Costs). 

(/)  R.  T.  Nottingham  Old  Waterworks,  6  A.  &  E.  355,t  and  sec  8  A.  &  E.  447, 
448.f  R.  r.  York  (J.),  1  A.  &  B.  828.  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  C85,f  and  see  R.  v.  Gardner, 
6  A.  &  E.  112.f     Sec  tit.  "  Costs." 

{ff)  R.  y.  Gardner,  1  N.  &  P.  308  ;t  6  A.  &  E.  112,1  S.  C. 


136  TArriNQ's    manda.mus. 

.]     Ap/>h'ra(io)i. — The  application  should  be  inado  to  the  Court 


■within  a  rcasouuble  time  after  the  land,  &.c.  is  taken,  or  elected  to  be 
taken,  by  the  conipan}'^,  especially  if  the  parties  have  another  remedy,  (/t) 
So  the  Court  will  refuse  it  if  the  company  be  proceeding  bona  fide,  al- 
though considerable  delay  may  have  taken  place  on  its  part;(i)  but  it  ia 
no  ground  for  refusing  the  writ  in  such  a  case,  that  the  period  of  time  to 
which  the  powers  of  the  act  of  rarliamcnt,  under  which  the  defendant 
should  have  acted,  have  elapsed. (j) 

.]     Ajjhlarifs. — The  affidavits  should,  if  possible,  show  that  the 

prosecutor  has  a  good  title,  and  is  ready  to  convey,  &c.,  or  that  he  has 
endeavoured  to  get  a  good  title,  but  could  not.(^) 

■]  OJire  Asscssidf/. — It  lies  also  to  command  a  municipal  corpo- 
ration to  assess  compensation  for  the  loss  of  a  corporate  office  under  stats. 

5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  76,  s.  35,  and  5  &  6  Vict.  c.  111,(0  aod  also  to  com- 
mand the  Lords  of  the  Treasury  to  hear  and  determine  the  merits  of  an 
appeal  on  a  claim  to  be  allowed  compensation  for  the  loss  of  such  an 
office  ;(wi)  but  the  Court  will  not  decide  as  to  the  principle  on  whicb  the 
decision  is  to  be  founded. (n)  Also,  if  the  lords  have  in  fact  heai'd  and 
determined  the  appeal  under  s.  66,  the  Court  will  not  interfere,  though 
it  may  be  satisfied  that  compensation  has  been  awarded  on  an  erroneous 
principle. (o)  So  the  Court  will  refuse  a  writ  to  command  the  Treasury 
Lords,  to  hear,  &c.,  if  it  appear  that  the  subject-matter  is  not  within  their 
jurisdiction. (^))  The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  grant  a  mandamus  to  enforce 
the  order  for  compensation  of  the  Lords  Commissioners,  but  not  at  the 
instance  of  one  whose  office  is  not  within  the  contemplation  of  the  act, (5) 

for  the  Court  will  not  interfere  *in  any  such  case,  except  when 
•-        -■  the  right  is  quite  clear.(r)     And  where  a  town  council,  in  obedi- 

[h)  Ante,  p.  18.  R.  V.  Stainforth  Canal,  1  M.  &  S.  ?.2.  R.  v.  Cockermouth  In- 
closure,  1  B.  &  Ad.  SSO.f  R.  v.  Leeds  Canal,  11  A.  &  E.  SlG.f  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D. 
174,  and  see  4  B.  &  Ad.  327,t  and  3  A.  &  E.  221,  222.f  See  post,  tit.  "Applica- 
tion." 

(i)  Ex  parte  Parkes,  9  D.  614. 

Ij)  8  A.  &  E.  911,t  supra.     See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Affidavits." 

(k)  R.  T.  Deptford  Pier,  8  A.  &  E.  QlO.f     See  tit.  "Application"  (Affidavits). 

(l)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  12  A.  &  E.  702.1  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  294,  where  see 
form  of  writ  and  pleadings.  R.  v.  Mancliester  (Borougli),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  27,  Q.  B.. 
where  see  a  form  of  writ.  R.  v.  Warwick  (Corp.).  10  A.  &  E.  38G.f  S.  C.  9  L. 
J.,  N.  S.  265,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Manchester  (Mayor),  5  Q.  B.,  402.f  Ex  parte  Harvev, 
3  N.  &  P.  159.  R.  V.  Warwick  (Corp.),  3  P.  &  D.  429.  R.  v.  Stamford  (Mayor),"6 
Q.  B.  433.f 

(m)  R.  T.  Treasury  Lords,  10  A.  &  E.  374.f  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  498  ;  and  see  10 
A.  &  E.  385-1  R.  v.*  Treasury  Lords,  10  A.  &E.  I79.t  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  369.  See 
lit.  "  Treasury  Lords." 

(n)  10  A.  <fc  E.  179,1  supra. 

(0)  10  A.  &  E.  179.f  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  369,  supra.  See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions'' 
(Appeal). 

(p)  10  A.  &  E.  I79.t  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  309,  and  10  A.  &  E.  374.t  S.  C.  2  P.  * 
D.  498,  supra.     Ante,  p.  16. 

(q)  R.  V.  Bridgewater  (Mayor),  W.  W.  &  D.  129  ;  6  A.  &  E.  339-1  S-  C-  1  N.  k 
P.  466,f  supra.  R.  v.  Poole  (Corp.),  7  A.  &  E.  735,  737,  743.t  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P. 
119.  R.  V.  Treasury  Lords,  10  A.  &  E,  183.f     See  also  R.  v.  Treasury  Lords,  10  A. 

6  E.  380-f  R.  V.  Carmarthen  (Mayor),  11  A.  &  E.  13-f  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor). 
12  A.  &  E.  708.f  (r)  R.  v.  Jothum,  3  T.  R.  575.     Ante,  p.  27. 


COMPENSATION.  137 

cncc  to  a  mandamus,  assessed  compensation  for  the  loss  of  certain  offices 
of  profit  under  the  provisions  of  stat.  5  &  G  Wui.  4,  c.  7G,  and  the  Ijords 
of  the  Treasury,  on  appeal,  assessed  a  larger  amount  of  compensation,  it 
was  held  that  the  assessment,  under  the  writ,  estopped  the  town  council 
from  denying  the  claim  to  compensation,  and  therefore  the  Court  of  Jj. 
K.  was  right  in  granting  a  mandamus  calling  upon  the  town  council  to 
execute  a  bond  according  to  the  provisions  of  the  act,  to  secure  the 
amount  assessed  by  the  Lords  of  the  Treasury. (.s) 

.]     Bond. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  a  municipal  corporation 

to  prepare  and  execute  a  bond  under  its  common  seal,  to  secure  the  pay- 
ment of  an  annuity,  &c.,  ascertained  and  awarded  by  the  Lords  of  the 
Treasury  for  the  loss  of  a  corporate  office,  over  which  they  had  jurisdic- 
tion. (<)  For  wherever  the  Lords  of  the  Treasury  make  an  order  on  the 
town  council  of  a  borough  for  compensation,  the  Court  of  B.  11.  will,  on 
a  neglect  or  refusal  by  them  to  comply  therewith,  enforce  its  fulfilment 
by  mandamus,  (h) 

.]     Payment. — So  it  lies  to  command  a  municipal  corporation  to 

enforce  payment  of  the  existing  borough  rates,  or  to  make  and  cause  to 
be  collected  another  borough  rate,  and  therewith  pay  instalments  on  a 
compensation  bond ;  but  such  a  writ  must  show  that  the  corporation  has, 
or  professes  to  have,  no  other  means  of  paymcnt.(?;) 

So  the  Court  on  a  proper  case  will  grant  a  mandamus  to  restore  to  the 
office,  or  for  compensation  for  the  removal. (w)  But  the  Court  will  refuse 
such  a  writ  where  the  refusal  of  the  town  council  to  award  compensation 
has  been  confirmed  by  the  Treasury  Lords,  or  where  the  right  to  com- 
pensation is  purely  nominal. (cc) 

.]     As  to  damage  done  by  Rioters,  see  tit.  Riots. 

* .]     Sheriffs. — It  lies  also  to  command   compensation  to 

sheriffs  on  abolition  of  fees  under  stat.  55  Geo.  2,  c.  50,  s.  10.(  ?/)    ^       -' 

(.?)  Sandwich  (Jlayor)  v.  R.,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  Q.  B,  432. 

[l]  R.  y.  Norwich  (Mayor),  3  Q.  B.  285. f  S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  005  ;  11  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
246,  Q.  B.  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  3  Q.  B.  550.f  S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  580.  S.  C.  11  L. 
J.,  N.  S.,  326,  Q.  B.,  where  see  form  of  writ.  S.  C.  6  Jur.  1082.  R.  v.  Newbury 
(Mayor),  1  Q.  B.  Vol.f  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  388.  S.  0.  2  G.  &  D.  109,  where  see  form 
of  writ.  S.  C.  2  Jur.  821.  R.  v.  Sandwicli  (Mayor),  2  G.  &  D.  28.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B. 
895  ;t  1  N.  &  P.  466.f  S.  0.  6  A.  &  E.  339,f  supra.  R.  v.  Poole  (Mayor),  3  N.  & 
P.  119.  S.  C.  7  A.  &  E.  730-1  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  4  P.  &  D.  294.  S.  C. 
12  A.  &  E.  V02,t  where  see  form  of  writ,  &c.  S.  C.  Io'L.  J.,  N.  S.  25,  Q.  B.  R.  v. 
Norwich  (Mayor),  8  A.  &  E.  633.f  R.  v.  Swansea  Harbour,  11  A.  &  B.  68.f  R. 
v.  Yorlv  (Mayor),  8  D.  502.  R.  v.  Liyerpool  (Mayor),  3  N.  &  P.  280.  S.  C.  8  A.  & 
B.  ITG.f  R.  V.  Swansea  (Mayor),  3  P.  &  D.  16.  S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  17,  Q.  B.  R. 
V.  Carmarthen  (Mayor),  3  P.  &  U.  35.  S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  25,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Sand- 
wich (Mayor),  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  132,  Q.  B.  Sandwich  (Mayor)  y.  R.,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
432,  Q.  B.     See  tit.  "Lectureship,"  (Compensation). 

(u)  1  N.  &  P.  466.f     S.  C.  0  A.  &  E.  339,f  supra.    See  tit.  "  Act  of  Parliament." 

\v)  R.  y.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  Q.  B.  616.  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  728.  See  tits.  "  Borough 
Rate,"  "  Companjr,"  (Execution),  ''  Money." 

{w)  R.  y.  Newbury  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  388.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  751. f  See  tit.  '•  Of- 
fice" (Restoration). 

{x)  Ex  parte  Lee,  7  A.  &  E.  139.t  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  63  ;  W.  W.  &  D.  471 ;  1  Jur. 
474,  cited  in  R.  v.  Warwick  (Corp.),  3  P.  &  D.  430.     See  ante,  p.  15. 

(y)  R.  V.  Middlesex,  (J.),  3  B.  &  Ad.  lOO.f     See  tit.  "Sheriffs." 


138  tapping's    mandamus. 

Confirmation'.]  The  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  a  bishop  to 
coulirm  children. (v) 

Consecration.]     Sec  tit.  Bishop. 

Constable.]  It  lies  for  a  constable,  he  being  a  known  officer  con" 
cerned  in  the  peace,  and  appointed  to  administer  justice  in  relation  to  the 
public,  (a) 

This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


JONSTABLE. 

CoNSTABLS — Allowance  - 

- 

-     90 

Admission 

- 

- 

-     89 

Payment 

- 

-     90 

Appointment 

- 

- 

-     89 

Reimbursement 

. 

-     90 

Swearin<r  in    - 

- 

- 

-     89 

High  Constable. 

Restoration    - 

- 

- 

-     90 

Reimbursmentby   - 

- 

-     90 

Accounts 

- 

- 

-     90 

Bond     - 

- 

-     90 

.]     AJmiasion. — The  writ  lies   to  command  the  admission  of  a 

constable  to  his  office. (6) 

•]     Appointment. — So  a  mandamus  will  be  granted  to  command 

the  lord  of  a  manor  to  hold  a  Court  Leet,  for  the  purpose  of  appointing 
a  high  constable  of  a  hundred,  although  the  day  on  which  the  Court  had 
usually  been  held  for  sixty  years  past,  had  gone  by,  it  not  being  sworn 
that  the  Court  was  held  on  that  particular  day  by  prescription. (f) 

.]     Swear iny  in. — So  it  lies  to  command  the  swearing  in  of  a 

constable. (f/)  Thus,  it  lies  to  command  justices  to  swear  in  constables  ap- 
pointed at  the  Icet  during  their  absence,  and  who  could  not,  therefore,  be 
sworn  in  at  such  Court,  (e)  So  it  lies  to  command  the  steward  of  a  Court 
Leet  to  swear  in  a  constable  appointed  by  him ;  but  if  he  be  not  a  stew- 
ard by  patent  he  cannot  hold  a  Court  without  the  lord's  direction;  so 
that  it  would  appear  by  affidavits  in  support  of  the  application,  in  what 
*way  the  steward  is  appointed,  in  order  to  obviate  an  answer  to 
^  ^  the  application,  that  since  the  writ,  there  has  been  no  Court  held 
at  which  to  swear,  &c.(/) 

.]     Restoration — So  it  lies  to  restore  a  constable  improperly  de- 

[z)  Case  of  St.  Burian's  Dean,  cited  in  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  66.  S.  C.  2  Keb. 
165,  per  Moreton,  J. ;  Fitzh.  N.  B.  200,  A.  See  Middleton's  case,  1  Sid.  169,  per 
Windham,  J.     See  tits.  "  Abbot,"  "  Bishop,"  "  Chrism." 

(a)  R.  V.  Kingscleere  (Churchwardens),  2  Lev.  18.  Estwick  v.  London  (City), 
Sty.  42  :Anon.  Popb.  12,  13;  see  also  Stamp's  case,  Raym.  12.  Anon.  Freem.  21; 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.     See  tit.  '•  Office." 

{b)  Adm.  Xoy.  78,  dub.  Constable's  case,  1  Buls.  174,  which  was  a  writ  of  res- 
titution;  Com.'^Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.);  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (C.) 

(c)  R.  V.  Milverton  (Manor),  3  A.'  &  E.  284.t  S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  282.  Sec  tits. 
"Man."  (Leet),  "Office"  (Appointment). 

[d)  Patrick's  case,  Raym.  111.  R.  v.  Oxenden,  1  Show.  219.  Constable's  case, 
Comb.  285:  Scriv.  on  Copyh.  715,  n.  {a)  4th  edit.  ;  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  471,  where  see 
form  of  writ.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Swearing  in). 

(«)  Anon.  2  Barn.  129  ;  and  see  1  Salk.  175. 

(/)  Comb.  285,  supra;  Scriv.  on  Copyh.  715, n.  (m).  4th  edit. 


CONSTABLE.  139 

prived  of  bis  offico,(,7)  of  which  there  are  precedents  as  ancient  as  tlie 
times  of  Edw.  2,  3,  and  Ilcn.  G.(/t) 

.]     Acamnl.Sj  AUoivancc. — It  lies  to  command  justices  at  sessions 

to  enter  continuances,  and  hear  an  appeal  against  the  allowance  by  them 
of  the  constable's  accounts,  under  stat.  18  Cleo.  8,  c.  25,  s.  5;(t)  or 
against  the  allowance  of  a  certain  item  in  such  accounts. (_/) 

.]  Payment. — The  Court  will  not  interfere  to  command  a  con- 
stable to  pay  money  levied  by  him  in  his  official  capacity,  and  over  which 
the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions,  has  an  equally  effective  jurisdiction. 
Thus,  where  a  constable  had  levied  money  under  a  distress  and  sale,  but 
afterwards  had  rescinded  the  sale,  under  the  idea  that  it  was  erroneous, 
and  had  restored  the  money  to  the  purchaser,  and  the  goods  to  the  owner, 
the  Court  refused  to  interfere. (/c) 

.]     Reimhursement  of. — It  has  been  granted  to  command  the 

treasurer  of  a  county  to  reimburse  constables  certain  extraordinary  char- 
ges in  providing  carriages  for  the  king's  forces  under  stat.  1  Geo.  1,  c.  34, 
on  the  expedition  into  Scotland. (?)  But  it  was  held  not  to  lie  to  com- 
mand the  treasurer  of  a  county  to  reimburse  constables  under  the  stat. 
17  Ceo.  2,  c.  5,  ss.  IG,  17,  relating  to  rogues  and  vagabonds,  &c.,  until 
such  accounts  had  been  allowed  by  the  Quarter  Sessions,  (m) 

High  Constable.]  Rehnburscment. — It  has  been  held  not  to  lie  for 
the  purpose  of  procuring  the  reimbursement  to  a  parish,  upon  which  the 
high  constable  had  levied  excessive  rates,  in  disobedience  of  an  order  of 
sessions  for  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  command  the  magistrates  in  ses- 
sions to  do  that  which  may  occasion  costs,  for  which  they  have  no  means 
of  reimbursing  themselves. (».) 

.]     Iltyli   Oriistahlc  s  Bond. — It  lies  to  command  justices,  or  the 

*clerk  of  the  peace,  to  put  in  suit  a  high  constable's  bond,  given    ^j-^-.  -, 
under  stat.  12  Geo.  2,  c.  29,  but  not  if  the  condition  be  not  strictly      ^ 
in  accordance  with  the  statute,  otherwise  the  Court  would  be  lending  its 
assistance  to  enforce  an  illegality. (o) 

{g)  Middlecot's  case,  10  Eliz.,  cited  in  Awdley's  case,  Poph,  17(3.  See  note  28 
to  Middletou's  case,  2  Dyer,  332  b.  333,  pi.  28  ;  Latch.  123  ;  Noy.  TS.  But  see  Con- 
stable of  Stepney's  case,  1  Buls.  174  ;  and  London  (City)  v.  Eastwick,  Sty.  33, 
which  were  writs  of  restitution ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit  '-Man."  (C.)  See  tit.  "Office" 
(Uestitution).  (A)  Ante,  p.  2,  Popli.  17G,  supra. 

(i)  11.  V.  Manchester  (J.),  D.  &  E.  454.  S.  C.  nom.R.  v.  Lancash.  (J.),  5  B.  &  A. 
7r).'),t  citing  R.  v.  Pascoe,  2  M.  &  S.  343. 

(./)  R.  V.  Lancash.  (J.),  5  B.  &  A.  755.f 

(k)  Morley  v.  Stacker,  6  Mod.  83;  the  Court  saying  tliat  if  the  mandamus  went, 
find  he  should  disobey  it,  the  Court  could  only  fine  him  for  tlic  contempt,  which 
the  justice  of  the  i)cace,  who  granted  the  warrant,  couhl  do  as  well.  R.  t.  Nash. 
Ld.  Raym.  USU.     S.  C.  1  Salk.  147.     See  tit.  "Office"  (Jlinistcrial,  Inferior). 

[1)  Hunt's  case,  IL  3  G.,  and  E.  4,  G. ;  Stra.  42,  93  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.) 

(m)  R.  V.  Erie,  Burr.  1107,  11!)8  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.  2.  See  tit.  "  County" 
(Treasurer.) 

(w)  4  N.  &  M.  312,1  supra.  See  ante,  p.  17.  See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions"  {3\x¥- 
tices). 

(o)  Ante,  p.  10.  In  re  Lodge,  2  A.  &  E.  123.f  S.C.  4  N.  &  M.  312,f  nom.  E.t 
parte  Carlton  High  Dale  (Inhabs). 


140  tapping's    mandamus. 

Contract.]  The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  a  public  board,  as  the 
Lords  Commissioners  of  the  Admiralty,  to  carry  a  contract  into  effect. (j>) 
But  it  has  been  granted  to  command  an  overseer  to  pay  a  sum  of  money 
in  pursuance  of  a  parish  contract. (</) 

Conviction.]  Appeal. — The  writ  has  in  numberless  cases  been  granted 
to  command  inferior  jurisdictions  to  enter  continuances,  and  hear  an 
appeal  against  a  record  of  conviction,  where  a  right  to  appeal  is  given, 
&C.0-) 

.]     Judgment,  d'c. — So  it  lies  to  command  tbe  Quarter  Sessions 

or  justices  to  enforce  a  conviction, (s)  if  clearly  good,  but  not  if  its  validity 
be  doubtful ;(?)  as  to  commit  to  prison  in  pursuance  of  a  conviction, (r) 
or  to  command  the  issue  of  a  distress  warrant  for  the  levying  of  a  penalty 
under  a  conviction. (w)  There  must,  however,  be  a  legal  and  formal  con- 
Tiction.(x)  So  that  the  Court  bas  refused  to  command  a  magistrate  to 
enforce  a  conviction,  where  it  was  returned  that,  notwithstanding  the 
defendant  was  convicted  of  a  penalty,  yet  that  the  conviction  was  invalid 
in  law,  and  that  there  was  not  an  offence  for  which  the  penalty  was  pay- 
able or  could  legally  be  levied.(.y)  So  where  justices,  having  made  a  con- 
viction, refused  to  take  any  steps  to  enforce  the  conviction,  under  an  idea 
that  they  would  thereby  render  themselves  liable  to  a  penalty  under  the 
Habeas  Corpus  Act,  this  Court  in  its  discretion  refused  a  mandamus  to 
the  justices  to  compel  them  to  issue  a  warrant  of  commitment  or  of  dis- 
tress, upon  the  conviction. (,r) 

It  is  submitted,  however,  that  as  the  stat.  6  &  7  Yict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  in- 
r^^Qoi  demuifies*  for  all  acts  done  under  a  peremptory  mandamus,  that 
"  the  Court  will  not  now  require  so  strict  proof  of  the  correctness  of 
a  conviction. (a) 

As  to  a  mandamus  for  the  costs  of  a  conviction,  see  tit.  Costs. 

.     Record. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  justices  or  the  Court 

{p)  Ex  parte  Pering,  4  A.  &  E.  94n.f  S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  477.f  See  tits.  "Act  of 
Parliament"  (Api)lication),  "Patent." 

(q)  R.  V.  Beeston,  3  T.  R.  592.  See  tits.  "Money,"  "Overseer,"  "Parish." 

(r)  R.  V.  Staffordsh.  (J.),  12  East.  571.  R.  v.  Hants  (J.),  1  B.  &  Ad.  G54.t  R.  v. 
Middlesex  (J.),  6  M.  &  S.  279.  R.  v.  Oxford.^h.  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  446.  R.  v.  West  Ri- 
ding (J.),  3  M.  &  S.  493.  .R.  V.  Middlesex  (J.),  G  M.  &  S.  279.  R.  v.  Huntingdonsh. 
(J.).  5  D.  &  R.  588.  R.  V.  Bccifordsii,  (J.),  3  P.  &  D.  21.  R.  v.  Chcsb.  (J.),  3  P.  &  D. 
23,  n.(a).  R.  v.  Bolton  (Recorder),  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  33,  M.  C.  See  tits.  "  Courts,  Infe- 
rior" (Appeal),  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

{.?)  R.  V.  War\vick.sh.  (J.),  2  A.  &  E.  768-1  R.  v.  Broderip,  7  I).  &  R.  SGl.f  S.  C. 
5  B.  &  B.  239.  R.  v.  Middx.  (J.),  2  II.  &  W.  222.  R.  v.  Robinson,  2  Smith,  274.  Ex 
parte  Thomas,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  57,  M.  C.    See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices).  ' 

{t)  But  see  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  App.,  which  alters  the  law  in  this  respect, 

[v)  R.  V.  Twyford,  5  A.  &  E.  430,f  but  the  right  to  convict  must  be  clearly 
shewn. 

(w)  R.  V.  Broderip,  5  B.  &  0.  240.t  S.  C.  7  D.  &  R.  SGl.f  R.  v.  Hughes,  3  A.  &  E. 
428.t  R.  V.  Mirehouse,  2  A.  &  E.  63 7. f 

(x)  R.  T.  Jones,  2  Barn.  239. 

(»/)  R.  T.  Robinson,  2  Smith,  274 ;  but  ?ce  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  App. 

(z)  Ex  parte  Thomas,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  57,  M.  C.  Ante.  p.  12,  13. 

(a)  See  stat.  App. 


CORONERS.  141 

of  Quarter  Sessions  to  complete  the  record  of  a  conviction. (A)  Thus  it 
liCvS  to  coninuind  the  insertion  in  a  record  of  a  conviction  under  stat.  14 
(ieo.  3,  c.  78,  of  the  evidence  given  on  the  hearing  of  the  information 
Tipon  which  the  conviction  was  founded,  as  nearly  as  possible  in  the 
words  used  by  each  of  the  witnesses  examined  in  pursuance  of  stat.  3  Geo. 
4,  c.  23,  it  being  suggested  that  they  liad  omitted  many  points  of  the  evi- 
dence material  to  the  defendant's  casc.(c)  So  the  like  writ  has  been 
granted  as  to  convictions  under  the  (Jamc  Trespass  Act.(((f) 

Copyhold  Court.]    See  tit.  Manor  {Cvjtijlujld  Court). 

Coroners.]  It  is  clear  that  the  writ  of  mandamus  is  applicable  to 
the  office  of  coroner. (c). 

.     Election. — Thus  it  will  be  granted  to  command  tlic  proceeding 

to  an  election  of  coroners,  under  stat,  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  s.  2.(/) 

.]     Unties,  &r. — It  lies  also  to  command  a  coroner  to  proceed 

with  an  inquisition  super  visum  corporis,  if  duly  assembled  and  properly 
Jiolden.(y)  But  not  if  such  inquisition  be  irregular,  for  as  an  inquisition 
resulting  from  such  an  inquiry  might  be  quashed,  so  the  Court  will  not 
grant,  but  on  the  contrary  refuse,  a  mandamus  to  command  the  doing  of 
an  useless  act.  Thus,  as  a  coroner's  duty  is  judicial,  and  he  can  only 
take  an  inquest  super  visum  corporis,  so  an  inquest  in  which  the  jury 
are  not  sworn  by  the  coroner  himself,  and  super  visum  corporis,  is  abso- 
lutely void.  Therefore  the  Court  will  not,  after  an  adjournment  by  the 
coroner  of  such  an  inquest,  grant  a  mandamus  to  compel  him  to  proceed 
in  it;  for  (as  before  stated),  the  only  result  of  such  a  proceeding  would 
be,  that  the  inquest,  if  proceeded  in,  would  be  lad^  and  the  record  might 
be  quashed. (//.) 

.]     Payment  of  Fees,  &c. — It  also  lies  to  command  the  Quarter 

Sessions  to  make  an  order  for  the  payment  to  a  county  coroner  of  a  sum 
of  money  out  of  the  county  rate,  due  to  him  under  stat.  25  Geo.  2,  c.  29, 
s.  1,  for  his  own  fees  and  for  money  expended  for  the  duly  taking  certain 
post  mortem  inquisitions,^/)  as  for  mileage. (_/) 

*But  the  writ  will  be  refused,  if  the  justices  at  Quarter  Ses-  p  ^.^.q -i 
sions  (who  have  a  discretion)  be  of  opinion  that,  under  the  cir-  •-  -' 
cumstanccs,  there  is  no  ground  to  suppose  that  the  deceased  has  died  any 
other  than  a  natural,  though  a  sudden,  death,  and  therefore  that  the 

[h)  R.  v.  Jones,  2  Barn.  240.     Sec  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Records). 

\c)  In  re  Rix,  4  D.  &  R.  352, f  citing  also  R.  v.  Marsh,  4  D.  &  R.  2G0.f 

[d]  R.  V.  Kiddy,  4  D.  &  R.  734.1  R.  v.  Warnford,  5  D.  k  R.  489-1 

(c)  Scarl)orougli's  case,  Str.  1180;  and  see  R.  v.  Woodrow,  2  T.  R.  (i32  ;  CotQ. 
Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A). 

(/)  See  stat.  App.  See  tit.  "Office."  See  also  stat.  G  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App. 

\g)  R.  T.  Farrand,  1  Chit.  745.f  S.  C.  3  B.  &  A.  2G0. 

\h)  Ante,  p.  15,  16. 

(?:)  R.  V.  Oxfordsli.  (J.),  2  B.  &  A.  203.  R.  v.  Warwicksh.  (J.),  S  D.  &  R.  147. 
S.C.  5  B.  &  C.  439.  R.v.  Kent  (J.),  11  East,  229.  R.  v.  Gannarthcusb.  (J.),  ICL.  J., 
N.  S.,  M.  C.  1G7. 

(y )  Supra,  5  B.  &  C.  430-1  S.  C.  8  D.  &  R.  147.t 


142 


TAPriNQS     MANDAMUS. 


inquisition  lias  not  l)ccn  duly  taken;  and  tlic  Court  of  B.  R.  sees  no  rea- 
son to  interfere  with  that  judgmcnt.(/i-) 

So  it  lies  to  couunaud  the  payment  of  the  fees  of  a  coroner  of  a  borough 
or  franchise ;  although  if  such  franchise  do  not  contribute  to  the  county 
rate  the  coroner  will  not  bo  entitled  to  the  fees  given  by  stat.  25  Geo.  2, 
c.  29;  or  to  any  foes  to  be  paid  by  the  county. (^) 

As  to  a  coroner's  duty  in  reference  to  compensations,  see  tit.  Compen- 
sdtion  (^Company). 

Corporation  Municipal.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows : — 

ConPOUATtON,  MUSICIPAI.. 

Duties,  &c.  -  -  -  . 
[nsigiiia  Books,  &c.,  Delivery 
JJooks,  &c.,  Inspection    - 

Rule       .... 
("orapensation 

.]     DutlrR,  tf'c. — It  is  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  B. 


Corporation,  Muxicip 

AI,. 

m 

Freedom 

- 

- 

-     9(> 

94 

Aflixing  Seal 

- 

- 

-     9() 

94 

By  Laws 

- 

- 

-     9G 

95 

Franchise 

- 

. 

-     96 

95 

R.,  to  command  by  mandamus,  that  all  the  officers  of  municipal  corpora- 
tions should  do  their  duty  in  their  respective  offices,(m)  they  being  public 
officers. 

Thus  it  lies  to  command  them  to  assemble,  and  keep  Courts  or  a  Hall, 
and  there  to  transact  the  business  of  the  corporation, ((t)  as  to  sign  the 
corporation  leases,  &c.(o)  So,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  in  like  manner 
(n-der  the  doing  of  every  act  necessary  to  the  due  holding  of  such  Courts. 
Thus,  it  will  command  the  steward,  ka.,  to  attend  with  the  public  books 
at  the  next  corporate  assembly,(p)  or  to  deliver  them  up,  if  improperly 
detained, (g)  *and  to  command  the  reception  of  a  vote  for  the  clec- 


[=^=94] 


tion  of  municipal  officers. (/•) 


But  it  will  not  command  the  entry  of  certain  resolutions  in  the  minute 
books  of  the  corporation,  for  in  order  to  their  validity,  they  should  be 
entered,  when  passed,  and  not  afterwards. (r?-) 

(k)  Ante,  p.  12,  11  East,  229,  and  16  L.  J.,  N.  S..  M.  C.  107,  supra. 

(I)  R.  V.  AYest  Riding  (J.),  T  T.  R.  48,  cited  in  R!  v.  Oxford  (Ep.),  7  East,  351. 

(in)  8  Mod.  28 ;  and  sec  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  st.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4.  and  1  Vict.  c.  78. 
s.  20,  App.  Sec  tits.  ''Company,"  "Councillor,"  (Duties),  "Franchise,"  "Free- 
dom," "Office." 

(w)  R.  V.  Kingston-upon-HuU  (Mayor),  8  Mod.  210.  S.  C.  Stra.  578.  S.  C.  II 
Mod.  r!82.  See  stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  App.  Andr.  184;  Barn.  82;  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
•'Man."  (D.)     Sec  tits.  "  Courts,  Inferior,"  "Manor"  (Court  Leet). 

The  rule  for  this  purpose  must  be  general,  and  not  add  "  to  admit  all  those  to 
their  freedom  who  have  a  right  to  be  free,  &c. ;"  for  several  interests  cannot  be 
comprised  iu  one  writ,  8  Mod.  210;  Salk.  433.  See  post,  tit.  "AViit"  (Mandatory 
Clause). 

{o)  R.  V.  Liverpool  (City),  1  Barn.  82  ;  Andr.  184.  Dr.  Walker's  case,  Cas.  t. 
Hard.  214. 

(;*)  Calne's  case,  Str.  948,  where  see  form  of  alTulaTit.  S.  C.  2  Barn.  2.^5.  There 
nuLst  be  an  affidavit  of  a  refusal  to  produce.  R.  v.  Wildman,  Stra.  879  ;  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "Man."  (A.)  ;  3  Bl.  Com.  110.     See  tit.  "Church"  (Church  trustees). 

(q)  R.  V.  Ingram,  1  W.  Blac.  50.     See  tit.  "  Books,"  &c. 

(>)  R.  V.  Leeds  (Mayor),  4  P.  &  D.  632.     See  post,  tit.  "  Vote." 

\rr)  Ante,  p.  15,  10.  R.  v.  Evesham  (Mayor).  3  N.  &  P. 351.  S.  C.  8  A.  &E.  266.f 
See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Records,  &c.) 


CORPORATION,    ETC,  l4'J 

.]     Jarij. — As  to  jury,  &c.,  sec  tits.  Manor,  (^Lcct)  Jury. 

.]  Insignia  Boohi;,  Delivery. — The  Court  of  13.  11.  is  iu  tlie  con- 
stant habit  of  granting  a  mandamu.s  to  command  municipal  and  parish 
officers,  magistrates,  &c.,  on  the  determination  of  their  official  duties,  to 
deliver  up  the  ensigns  of  their  offices. (.s) 

So  it  lies  to  command  an  ex-officer  as  a  mayor,  or  his  deputy,  to  dclivi;r 
to  the  present  mayor  the  common  seal,  books,  papers,  muniments,  records, 
insignia,  mace,  and  chest  keys,  being  the  property  of  the  corporation, (/:) 
and  to  deliver  up  and  account  for  all  rents,  moneys,  goods,  valuable  secu- 
rities, books  and  papers  of  the  corporation  under  stat.  5  &  G  AYm.  4,  c. 
7G.(«)_ 

So,  it  has  been  granted  to  command  the  delivery  of  them  up  to  one 
lately  wrongfully  turned  out  of  his  corporate  office,('i;)  but  before  the 
Court  will  grant  such  a  rule,  the  prosecutor  must  have  been  restored  to 
his  office. 

.]  Boohs,  &c.,  inspection. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  munici- 
pal corporation  to  give  inspection,  and  copy  to  the  members  thereof,(w) 
of  all  its  records,  bj'c-laws,  books,  &c.,  because  they  are  of  a  public  nature, 
and  *kept  for  the  use  of  the  body  at  large. (a)  Thus  where  a  dis- 
pute arose  between  the  freemen  of  the  new  corporation  of  Bever-  •-  -• 
ley,  and  the  corporation  with  respect  to  the  right  of  cutting  down  trees 
on  certain  pastures,  formerly  granted  to  the  burgessess  of  the  old  corpo- 

(«)  8  Mod.  28;  Bac.  Abr.  tif.  -Man."  fD.)  See  tits.  •'•  Books,  &c.,"  •■Church" 
(Keys),  "  Insignia." 

[t)  3  Bl.  Com.  110.  R.  v.  Bullor,  8  East,  388,  where  see  forms  of  necessary  afli- 
(lavits.  R.  V.  Gaborian,  11  East,  82,  87.  R.  v.  Dublin  (Dean),  Str.  537.  Crawford 
V.  Powell,  Burr.  1013.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  229.  R.  v.  Owen,  5  J[od.  314.  R.  v. 
Ingram,  1  W.  Blac.  50.  R.  v.  Nottingham  (Sheriff),  1  Sid.  31.  R.  v.  Clapbam,  1 
Wils.  305  ;  Stra.  870,  948  ;  Anon.  1  Barn.  402,  and  Scarborough's  case  there  cited. 
Northampton's  case,  1  Comb.  102.  R.  v.  Witchurch,  2  Barn.  447.  R.  v.  Wheeler, 
Cas.  t.  Hard.  99.  S.  C.  Cunn.  Rep.  155.  If  the  town  clerk,  &c.,  be  an  attorney  or 
solicitor,  his  lien  must  be  satisfied,  and  that  before  application  made.  R.  v.  San- 
key,  6  N.  &  M.  839  ;f  but  see  R.  v.  Earle,  Burr.  1197;  and  see  tit.  "Attorney." 
(Rolls).  See  stat.  5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  7G,  s.  60  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  See  tits. 
••  Books,"  "  Insignia,"  "  Town  Clerk." 

A  writ  to  deliver  Isooks  does  not  include  the  Common  Seal.  Hastings.  H.,  24 
(Jeo.  3  ;  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  202. 

ill)  R.  V.  Greene,  6  A.  &  E.  548.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  G31.f  R.  v.  Frost,  1  P.  &  D. 
75.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  822. 1  But  the  applicants  for  such  writ  must  be  either  the 
town  council,  treasurer,  or  other  authorized  party,  and  not  any  individual  having 
a  remote  interest  in  the  corporation  funds,  although  ultimately  entitled  to  the 
money.  See  tits.  "Accounts,"  '-Books, "  &c.  See  ante,  p.  27,  and  post.  tit.  ••  A)i- 
plication." 

(r)  R.  T.  Ilolford,  2  Barn.  330,  350,  and  cases  there  cited,  where  see  as  to  wii mi 
the  rule  and  writ  should  be  directed.     See  post,  tits.  ''Rule,"  ''Writ,"  (Direction). 

{w)  Southampton  (Mayor)  v.  (rraves,  8  T.  R.  550,  and  see  5  A.  &  E.  78H.|  R. 
V.  Autrobns,  2  A.  &  E.  788  :f  3  Wils.  398.  Waniner  v.  Giles,  Stra.  954.  See  tits. 
"Accounts,"  "Books,"  "  Companv,"  ••County,"  "  Ilighwav,''  "Livings,  &c.,'' 
"  Manor,"  (Rolls,  &c.) 

(z)  R.  T.  Merchant  Taylors,  2  B.  &  Ad.  115.f  R.r.  Newcastle  (Fraternity),  Stra. 
1223,  3rd  edit.,  where  see  an  elaborate  note  upon  this  subject.  Love  v.  Bentley,  11 
Mod.  134.  R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  8  B.  &  C.  *112.f  Ld.  Ravra.  337  ;  2  Chit.  288.t  R.  v. 
Westowe  (Chvu-chwardens).  5  A.  &  E.  78C.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  222.f  R.  v.  Beverley 
(Mayor),  8  D.  140. 


144  tapping's    mandamus. 

nition,  and  an  injunction  to  restrain  tlic  cutting  down  of  the  trees,  having 
been  obtained  by  the  corporation,  a  mandamus  was  granted  at  tlic  instance 
of  the  freeman,  to  permit  them  to  inspect  the  deeds,  &c.,  concerning  the 
pastures  in  question,  which  were  in  the  possession  of  the  new  corpora- 
tion, with  a  view  to  dissolve  the  injunction. (y) 

As  a  general  rule,(;;)  however  it  must  always  in  support  of  the  applica- 
tion be  shewn,  that  such  inspection  is  necessary,  with  reference  to  some 
specific  action,  dispute,  or  question  depending,  in  which  the  applicants  for 
inspection  are  interested,  and  the  inspection  will  be  limited  to  the  re- 
quirements of  the  particular  circumstances  of  the  occasion. (a)  So  that, 
where  applicants  for  inspection,  although  members  of  the  corporation, 
merely  alleged  as  grounds,  that  they  believed  that  its  affairs  were  impro- 
perly conducted,  and  the  officers  unduly  chosen,  and  complained  of  mis- 
government  in  some  particular  instances,  not  affecting  the  parties  them- 
selves, or  any  matter  then  in  dispute,  and  thereupon  applied  for  a  manda- 
mus for  inspection,  and  copy  of  all  records,  books,  muniments,  &c.,  in 
possession  of  the  corporation,  or  relating  to  its  affairs ;  the  Court  dis- 
charged the  rule  with  costs.  (^>)  Nor  will  the  rule  be  granted  on  the  sugges- 
tion of  mere  surmise,  for  the  purpose  of  shaking  titles  unimpcached  at 
the  time  of  the  application. (c)  So,  the  Court  has  refused  inspection  of 
the  corporation  books  to  a  stranger  to  the  corporation,  although  an  action 
was  pending. (c/) 

.  Rule. — The  rule  absolute  for  a  peremptory  mandamus,  for  in- 
spection and  copy,  usuall}'^  commands  the  corporation  to  allow  the  prose- 
cutor or  his  attorney,  to  inspect  such  of  the  corporation  books  as  relate 
to  the  matter  in  question  in  the  cause,  and  that  the  town  clerk  should 
give  copies  of  the  bye-laws  to  the  prosecutor,  the  latter  paying  the  ex- 
pense of  such  copies,  and  also  paying  the  town  clerk  for  his  attend- 
ance, (e) 

.]     Compensation. — See  that  title. 

.]     Freedom. — See   that  title,  and  also  Company,  Fran- 

ise. 
.]    Seal,  Affixing. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  command  the  officer 


[-90]    ^, 


who  has  the  legal  custody  of  the  corporate  seal,  to  affix  it  to  any  docu- 
ment to  which  it  should  be  affixed  in  pursuance  of  the  resolution  of  the 
majority  of  such  corporation,  though  such  resolution  be  against  the  con- 

(?/)  R.  V.Beverly  (Mayor),  8  D.  140. 

(z)  R.  V.  Babb,  3  T.  R.  579,  per  Lord  Kevnon,  C.  J. 

(a)  Sec  ante,  p.  16,  n.  (/).  2  B.  &  Ad."  115,  122,t  supra;  Stra.  1223,  supra. 
R.  V.  Bab,  3  T.  R.  579,  R-  v.  Enghind  (Bank),  2  B.  &  A.  620.  Harrison  v.  Wil- 
liams, 4  D.  &  R.  820.f     Brewers'  Comi)any  v.  ]3enson,  Barnes,  23G. 

(b)  2  B.  k  Ad.  115,1  supra.     Sec  po.st,  tit.  "  Apiilicatiou  for  Writ." 

(c)  2  B.  k  Ad.  122,1  supra.     See  ante,  p.  16. 

(d)  Soutliatnpton  (Mayor)  v.  Graves,  8  T.  R.  590, cited  in  R.  v.  Beverly  (Mayor), 
8  D.  141.  Hodges  v.  Atkis,  3  Wils.  398  ;  2  W.  Blac.  877.  Cox  v.  Copping,  5  Mod. 
396.     See  tit.  "  Manor,"  (Rolls,  kc.) 

(fi)  4  D.  &  R.  823,f  supra.     See  post,  tit.  '■  Writ,"  (Maudatory  Clause.) 


CORPORATION,     ETC.  145 

sent  of  such  officei'.(/)  Thus,  such  court  has  commanded  the  putting  of 
the  corporate  seal  to  the  certificate  of  one,  who  claimed  to  have  heen 
elected  recorder,  though  the  corporation  had  certified  to  the  Crown  the 
election  of  another  candidate. («/) 

See  as  to  the  delivering  up  of  the  seal,  &c.,  supra.  Insignia,  &c. 

.]     Byc-laios. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  meeting  to  be  held  in 

pursuance  of  a  bye-law.  (/t)  But  in  the  absence  of  any  precedent,  the 
Court  will  refuse  a  mandamus  to  command  a  mayor,  &c.,  to  propose  a  re- 
solution to  the  burgesses  in  guild  assembled,  for  repealing  certain  bye- 
laws,  although  it  be  alleged,  that  by  the  charter,  bye-laws,  and  ordi- 
nances, may  be  made  ;  as  such  a  matter  is  entirely  within  the  discretion 
of  the  Mayor.  (Q 

As  the  words  "  shall  he  lawful"  in  a  bye-law  are  not  obligatory,  so  a 
mandamus  does  not  lie  to  enforce  them.(ji')  The  words  "  shall  and  may" 
are  not  imperative,  but  when  the  cause,  respecting  which  they  are  used,  is 
for  the  public  good  or  benefit,  (/t;) 

As  to  inspection  of  bye-laws,  see  supra,  tit.  Books,  &c.,  {Inspection.) 

.]     Franchise. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  may  command  the  ofl&cers  of 

a  municipal  corporation  to  do  their  duty  but  they  cannot  dictate  to 
them,  if  judicial  ofl&cers,  the  mode  of  doing  it.(^)  Thus,  where  a  party 
has  an  inchoate  right  to  be  admitted  a  member  of  a  corporation,  the 
Court  will  enforce  his  admission  by  mandamus. (m)  There  is  no  judicial 
power  in  a  body  corporate  to  adjudicate  as  to  whether  a  person  has  an  in- 
choate right  to  be  admitted  a  member  of  a  corporation,  such  being  a  mere 
ministerial  duty ;  and  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will,  as  before  stated,  enforce 
the  performance  of  such  duty  to  admit :  if,  however,  the  corporation  has 
an  option,  as  where  they  are  empowered  to  admit  members  or  not  at  their 
discretion,  then  an  admission  cannot  be  enforced  by  mandamus. (n) 

*CoRPORATiON,  Trading.]  Duties,  &c. — There  exists  no  in-  ^  -^q^  -, 
stance  in  which  the  Court  has  granted  a  writ  of  mandamus  to  a 

(/)  Sec  ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Beeston,  3  T.  R.  594,  citing  R.  v.  Widliam  Cowp.  377, 
with  approbation;  3  Bl.  Com.  110.  See  tits.  "College,"  (Seal),  "Hospital," 
(Seal). 

(//)  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  4  T.  R.  699.     R.  v.  Beedle,  3  A.  &  E.  475.1 

\li)  \l.  V.  Durham,  (Mayor),  Burr.  131.  See  tits.  "  Churchwardens,"  (Election,) 
"  Parish."  "  Vestry." 

(«■)  Garrett  v.  Newcastle  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  252,|  and  cases  there  cited.  See 
ante,  p.  12,  13,  &:c.  See  form  of  a  return  of  a  bye-law  to  a  writ  to  admit  to  the 
freedom  of  a  city  ;  R.  v.  Harrison,  Burr.  1323.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  372.  Aute,  p. 
12    13. 

(./ )  R.  V.  Eye,  (Bailiffs),  2  D.  &  R.  172.     See  tit.  "  Charters." 

(k)  R.  V.  Flockwold  Enclosure,  2  Chit.  251.f  R.  v.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  5  D.  & 
R.  414.f      Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) 

[l)  Supra,  tit.  "Duties,  &c.,"  and  post,  tit.  "Franchise,"  "Freedom,"  "Officer.'' 
(Officers  Judicial,  &c.) 

(«i)  Per  Abbott,  C.  J.,  in  R.  v.  West  Looe,  5  D.  &  R.  598.f  S.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  677-1 
cited  in  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  4  M.  &  R.  54.  S.  C.  9  B.  &  C.  l.f  And  see  tits. 
"Burgess,"  "  Resiant.     R.  v.  Physicians'  Coll.,  Burr.  218G.     See  tit.  "Freedom." 

{n)  See  ante,  p  12,  13,  &c.  R.  v.  Eye  (Bailiffs),  4  B.  &  A.  27l.t  S.  C.  2  D.  & 
R.  172.+     S.  C.  1  B.  &  C.  85,t  cited  in  4  M.  &  R.  54.    S.  C.  9  B.  &  C.  1,+  supra. 

April,  1852.— 10 


146  TAPPINa'S     MANDAMUS. 

trading  corporation,  having  no  public  duties  to  perform. (o)  The  Court 
has  refused  to  grant  a  mandamus  to  a  trading  corporation,  at  the  instance 
of  one  of  its  members,  to  compel  them  to  produce  their  accounts,  for  the 
purpose  of  declaring  a  dividend  of  the  profits ;  for,  in  eifect,  such  a  pro- 
ceeding is  but  an  application  on  the  behalf  of  one  of  several  partners  to 
compel  his  co-partners  to  produce  their  accounts  of  profit  and  loss,  and  to 
divide  those  profits,  if  any  there  be;  the  proper  Court  for  relief  in  such 
case  being  the  Court  of  Chancery. (j?) 

.]      Trade  Mark. — So  the  writ  docs  not  lie  to  command  a  trading 

company  to  give  to  one  of  its  members  a  recommendatory  mark,  without 
which  he  is  unable  to  carry  on  his  trade  with  eflFect.(2) 

Corpse.]  Delivery  up  of. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  gaoler  to  de- 
liver up  to  the  executors  of  the  deceased,  the  body  of  one  who  had  died 
while  a  prisoner  in  execution  in  his  custody,  notwithstanding  such  exe- 
cutors refuse  to  satisfy  certain  claims  made  against  the  deceased  by  the 
gaoler.  The  writ  in  such  a  case,  on  account  of  its  urgency,  will  be  per- 
emptory in  the  first  instance;  so  that  if  there  be  any  answer  to  it,  it  must 
be  shown  not  by  way  of  return,  but  on  showing  cause  against  a  rule  why 
an  attachment  should  not  issue. (r) 

The  erroneous  notion  that  a  dead  body  may  be  detained  for  debt,  and 
thereby  burial  prevented,  has  long  been  judicially  refuted,  on  the  ground 
that  the  exercise  of  such  a  power  to  deprive  a  body  of  funeral  rights  and 
Christian  burial  would  be  revolting  to  humanity. (s) 

As  to  burial  of  a  corpse,  see  tit.  Burial. 

Costs.]  Payment. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  magistrate  to  receive 
an  information  and  complaint  against  an  overseer  for  neglecting  to  pay  a 
specific  sum  of  money,  being  costs,  duly  certified  by  the  Court  of  General 
Quarter  Sessions.  (0  So  a  mandamus  has  been  granted  to  command  inter 
r*Qft  1  *^^^*'  *^^  payment  of  a  certain  sum  for  costs,(?<)  as  the  costs  of  a 
^  writ  of  mandamus. (i;) 

(o)  R.  V.  England  (Bank),  2  B.  &  A.  622.t  See  tits.  "  Bank  of  England,"  "  Com- 
pany," (Duties).     Ante,  p.  12. 

(/))  See  tit.  "  Equity,  pp.  22,  23,"  and  see  tits.  "  Accounts,  &c.,"  "  Bank  of  Eng- 
land." 

(q)  Anon.,  Ld.  Raym.  989. 

(r)  See  ante,  p.  16.  R.  v.  Fox,  2  Q.  B.  246,f  where  see  the  form  of  the  writ. 
S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  41,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  5GG,  nom.  In  re  Bailiff  of  Wake- 
field. S.  C.  nom.  In  re  Jewison,  5  Jur.  989.  See  R.  v.  Scott,  2  Q.  B.  248,t  an 
indictment  for  detaining  a  body.  So  25  Geo.  3,  Young  and  Others  were  indicted 
for  detaining  a  body  from  burial,  1  Chit.  595.  See  post,  tits.  "Attachment," 
"  Peremptory  Writ." 

(s)  Jones  V.  Ashburner,  4  East,  465,  per  Lord  Ellenborough,  C.  J.,  also  cited  in 
R.  V.  Coleridge  and  Others,  1  Chit.  595.f 

(t)  R.  V.  Long,  1  G.  &  D.  367.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  740.  See  tits.  "  Highway,"  (Re- 
pairs, Costs),  "  Money,"  (Payment),  "Overseer,"  "Poor,"  (Costs),  "Quarter  Ses- 
aions,"  (Justices.) 

(u)  R.  V.  St.  Katharine  Dock,  4  B.  &  Ad.  SGO.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  l\.  121,t  cited  in 
R.  V.  Clark,  1  D.  &  M.  690.     S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  887.f     See  tit.  "Company." 

(y)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  82,  Q.  B.     See  post,  tit.  "  Costs." 


COSTS.  147 

But  the  Court  will  not  grant  the  writ  for  such  a  purpose  if  there  be 
another  remedy  whereby  they  can  be  recovered.  Thus,  the  writ  will  not 
be  granted  to  command  the  treasurer  of  a  town  or  county  to  obey  an 
order  made  by  a  Judge  of  assize,  for  payment  by  him  of  the  costs,  &c. 
of  the  prosecutor  of,  and  witnesses  in  an  indictment  for  a  misdemeanor 
under  stat.  7  Geo.  4,  c.  G4,  s.  23,  both  because  there  exists  another  reme- 
dy, yiz.  by  indictment,  and  that  the  treasurer  is  too  inferior  an  officer  to 
be  the  subject  of  the  writ.(tr)  Neither  will  the  writ  be  granted  to  com- 
mand the  payment  of  the  costs  of  a  former  mandamus.  Nor  for  costs 
given  by  statute,  if  it  provide  specific  legal  means  whereby  they  may  be 
obtained,  (x) 

As  to  the  procedure  by  mandamus  for  the  costs  of  a  sheriff's  inquisi- 
tion, and  of  the  costs  of  title  to  property  taken  by  railway,  see  tit  "  Com- 
pensation^' (  Company) .  (jj) 

.]     Enforcing  Payment. — So  it  lies  to  command  justices  of  the 

peace  to  enforce  the  payment  of  costs,  by  issuing  a  distress  warrant  to 
levy  the  same.(2;)  The  writ  also  lies  to  command  the  Court  of  Quarter 
Sessions  to  issue  a  disti-ess  warrant  for  costs  awarded  on  the  quashing  of 
a  conviction,  or,  in  other  words,  to  allow  the  means  of  enforcing  their 
own  order  to  that  party  in  whose  favour  such  order  is  made. (a)  The 
order  must,  however,  be  specific  and  certain  in  every  respect,  especially 
as  to  the  amount  of  the  costs.  Thus  where  a  Judge  of  assize,  after  the 
trial  of  an  indictment  for  nonrepair  of  a  road,  under  stat.  5  &  6  Wm.  4, 
c.  50,  s.  95,  made  an  order  that  the  costs  were  to  be  paid  by  the  parish, 
but  did  not  insert  therein  the  amount  either  then  or  at  any  subsequent 
time ;  the  Court  of  B.  R.  refused  to  enforce  such  an  order  by  manda- 
mus,(?<)  and  stated,  that  it  would  not  call  upon  a  party  to  pay  costs 
"generally;"  that  the  amount  must  be  properly  ascertained  and  in- 
serted, because  the  writ  must  follow  the  rule,  and  if  that  be  general  the 
defendant  cannot  know  how  he  is  to  perform  it,  that  is,  how  much  he  is 
to  pay. 

""Councillor  ;  Councilman.]  Common  or  Town. — The  writ  [-;^qq-, 
lies  for  the  office  of  common  councilman,(c)  because  it  is  an  office    L 

(w)  Ante,  p.  18— 23.  R.  v.  Jeyes,  5  N.  &  M.  lOl.f  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  41G.t  See 
tits.  "County,"  (Treasurer),  "Office."  (Ministerial  Inferior). 

\x)  R.  V.  Nottingham  Old  Waterworks,  6  A.  &  E.  355.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  480.f 
See  ante,  pp.  18 — 23. 

(y)  R.  V.  London  Railway,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  42,  Q.  B.     S.  C.  3  D.  &  L.  399. 

{z)  R.  V.  Martin,  1  D.  &  M.  38G.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  1037,t  n.  (a).  See  tit.  "  Quarter 
Sessions,"  (Justices).  As  to  the  indemnity  for  any  act  done  under  the  authority 
of  a  mandamus,  see  stat.  6  &  T  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  App. 

{a)  R.  v.  Hants  (J.),  1  B.  &  Ad.  654,  658.f  See  tits.  "  Conviction,"  "  Courts  In- 
ferior," (Judgment,  Execution,  &c.) 

{h)  See  ante,  p.  27.  R.  v.  Chxrk,  1  D.  &  M.  687.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  887,t  it  was  said 
in  this  case,  that  it  was  not  clear  that  a  mandamus  would  be  the  proper  remedy. 
R.  V.  London  Railway,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  42,  Q.  B.     S.  C.  3  D.  &  L.  399. 

(c)  Estwick's  case.  Sty.  32,  cited  in  Stamp's  case,  Raym.  12  ;  2  Roll.  456,  1.  35  ; 
Com.  Dig.  tit  "  Man."  (A).  And  see  stats.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  and  1  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  26, 
App. 


148  tapping's    mandamus. 

which  concerns  public  government  ;(cZ)  hut  the  officer  has  no  freehold  in 
Lis  office  as  an  alderman  has.(^) 

This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


Councilman,  &c. 

Election  -  -  -  -  09 
Admission  -         -         -  100 

Returns  -  -  -  100 
Admission  and  swearing  in  -  100 

Returns        -         -         -  100 


Councilman,  &c. — Dulles,  ^-c.  -  101 

Return          -        -  -  101 

Restoration    -        -        -  -  101 

Form  of  Writ        -  -  101 

Returns        -        -  -  101 

Removal     -         -         -  -  102 


]     Election. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  holding  of  a  general 

assembly  of  aldermen  and  common  councilmen,  to  proceed  to  their  election 
in  pursuance  of  an  act  of  Parliament  or  charter. (/)  But  not  if  there  be  no 
vacancy  or  a  disputed  one,  or  the  office  be  dc  facto  full  upon  an  election 
not  merely  colourable.  Thus,  where  a  town  councillor,  elected  under  stat. 
5  &  G  Wm.  4,  c.  76,  had  had,  during  his  term  of  office,  his  name  expunged 
from  the  burgess  roll  by  the  overseers,  for  alleged  nonpayment  of  rates,  but 
continued  to  exercise  his  office ;  the  Court  refused,  on  affidavit  of  those 
facts,  and  of  the  alleged  default,  to  issue  a  mandamus  to  the  mayor  or 
aldermen  of  the  ward  to  proceed  to  a  new  election,  because  the  vacancy 
should  have  been  first  ascertained  and  adjudged  by  judgment  on  a  quo 
icarranto  information. (r/)  For  where  a  councillor's  name  has  been  thus 
expunged,  qxio  xoarranto  is  the  only  proper  mode  whereby  to  try  his  title  to 
the  office,  and  not  a  mandamus  to  command  the  mayor  to  hold  a  fresh 
election,  (/t)  But  if  a  councillor  be  ousted,  and  another  elected  in  his  stead, 
and  such  election  be  merely  colourable,  and  therefore  void,  the  Court  will 
grant  a  mandamus  to  permit  the  ousted  party  to  exercise  his  office,  but  not 
*to  restore  him  to  it.  But  if  such  ouster  and  election  be  honajide,  the 
'-  -'  Court  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  in  favour  of  the  party  displaced, 
the  proper  proceeding  being,  as  before  stated,  by  quo  loarranio  against  the 
p:irty  holding  the  office  defacto.(i) 

(d)  R.  V.  Physicians  (College),  2  Sliow.  178,  per  Pemberton,  C.  J.  See  tit. 
"  Office,  (Public). 

(e)  5  Mod.  11,  per  Eyre,  J.     See  tits.  "  Alderman  Office,"  (Freehold). 

(/)  See  ante,  p.  11.  R.  v.  Chester  (Major),  1  M.  &  S.  101.  See  R.  v.  Salway, 
9  B.  &  C.  432,  435.f  R.  v.  Phippen,  7  A.  &  E.  OGo.f  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Ricketts, 
3  N.  &  P.  151.  S.  C.  2  Jur.  9(J6.  See  tits.  "  Corporation  Municipal,"  (Duties, 
&c.),  "  Courts  Inferior,"  (Holding,  &c.),  "Office,"  (Election). 

Before  application  is  made  for  the  writ  it  would  be  well,  if  it  be  intended  to  pro- 
ceed under  stat.  G  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App.,  to  see  that  all  the  requisitions  of  such 
statute  have  been  fully  observed. 

(ff)  See  ante,  pp.  26,  27  ;  7  A.  &  E.  966,f  supra.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  6  A. 
&E.  349.t  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  474.t  R.  v.  Winchester  (Mayor),  7  A.  &  E.  215.+  S. 
C.  2  N.  &  P.  274 ;  W.  W.  &  D.  525  ;  1  Jur.  738.  R.  v.  Birmingham  (Rector  of),  7 
A.  &  E.  255.7  R-  ■^^  Derby  (Councillors),  7  A.  &  E.  419.f  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  589. 
S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  671.     See  tits.  "  Burgess  Roll,"  "  Office,"  (Election.) 

(h)  R.  V.  Ricketts,  3  N.  &  P.  151.  R.  v.  AVinchester,  supra.  R.  v.  Oxford 
(Mayor),  1  N.  &  P.  474.t     S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  349.t     See  ante,  p.  26. 

(i)  See  ante,  p.  26.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  6  A.  &  E.  349.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  474.f 
R.  V.  Colchester  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  259.  R.  v.  Beedle,  3  A.  &  E.  467.+  And  see  7 
A.  &  E.  257,  421,t  supra.     See  tit.  "  Office,"  (Election). 


COUNCILMAN. 


149 


The  writ  lies,  however,  to  command  a  town  clerk  to  allow  inspection  of 
the  voting  papers  delivered  at  the  election  of  councillors,  under  stat. 
5  &  G  W.  4,  c.  7G,  and  to  make  extracts  therefrom(J). 

f,    .]     Admission. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  an  admission  into 

the  office  of  common  or  town  councilman,  and  to  vote  therein. (A;)  But 
not  if  there  be  no  vacancy  in  the  office,  or  a  disputed  one,  or  the  office  is 
de  facto  full  on  an  election  not  colourablo.(0 

.     Returns. — A  return  to  such  a  mandamus  may  traverse  all  or  any 

of  th&  suggestions  for  the  writ,  as  that  the  prosecutor  was  not  a  burgess, 
that  he  was  not  eligible  to  the  office  of  common  councilman,  that  he  was 
not  elected,  &c.  &c. ;  and  such  returns  have  been  held  out  to  be  in- 
consistent, and  therefore  good,  if  pleaded  together.(j>i)  But  a  return 
that  the  prosecutor  was  not  duly  elected  a  common  councilman  of  London, 
because  those  who  voted  for  him  had  not  paid  the  orphan  tax  in  pursu- 
ance of  Stat.  5  &  6  Wm.  &  M.,  c.  10,  is  bad,  because  a  freeman  of 
London  is  not  deprived  of  his  right  of  voting  for  a  common  councilman 
by  not  having  paid  such  tax,  if  it  be  not  demanded  of  him.(?i) 

.]    Admission  and  Swearing  in. — The  writ  has  also  been  granted 

to  command  the  admission  and  swearing  in  of  a  common  councilman, 
duly  elected. (o)  And  also  to  command  the  administering  of  the  solemn 
declaration  required  by  statute,  in  order  to  qualify  for  the  office. (^j) 

.  Returns. — It  was  formerly  held  to  be  a  good  return  to  a  man- 
damus to  swear  in,  &c.,  that  the  prosecutor  had  to  take  the  necessary  oaths 
pursuant  to  stat.  23  Car.  2.(q) 

.]     "^Duties,  &c. — The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  recep-  r*iQ]^-i 

tion,  &c.  at  a  corporate  meeting  of  the  council,  of  the  vote  of  one 
who  has  been  duly  elected  councillor,  and  who  is  duly  qualified  for  and 
has  accepted  such  office ;  and  also  to  permit  him  in  other  respects  to  ex- 
ercise such  office,  (r) 

(/)  R.  V.  Arnold,  6  N.  &  M.  152.f  See  tits.  "  Accounts,"  "  Books,  &c.,"  "  Cor- 
poration Municipal,"  (Inspection),  "Manor,"  (Rolls  Inspection,)  "Vote." 

(k)  See  R.  V.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  539,  per  Eyre,  J.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (^lajor), 
2  T.  R.  45G.  R.  v.  Winchester  (Mayor),  7  A.  &  E.  215.t  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  274.  R. 
V.  Leeds  (Mayor),  7  A.  &  E.  OGS.f  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  145.  S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  112, 
Q.  B. 

(l)  See  ante,  p.  26;  7  A.  &  E.  215,t  supra,  where  see  other  cases.  See  supra, 
Election,  and  tit.  "  Office,"  (Admission). 

(ot)  2  T.  R.  456,  supra.     See  post,  tit.  "Return,"  (Traverse). 

(?i)  Warden  v.  Rous,  7  Mod.  323.    See  post,  tit.  "  Return,"  (Certainty). 

(o)  Anon.,  2  Barn.  24.  Gay  v.  Cross,  7  Mod.  37,  and  cases  tliere  cited.  ATarden 
V  Rous,  7  Mod.  323.  R.  v.  Love,  12  Mod.  601.  Fludier  v.  Lombe,  Cas.  t.  Hard. 
307.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (C.)  See  tits.  "  Alderman,"  "  Office,"  (Admission) 
(Swearing  in),  "  Town  Clerk."  „    ^  ^tt 

in)  R.  V.  Derby  (Councillors),  7  A.  &  E.  419.t  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  589.  S.  C.  W. 
W  &  D.  671.     See  tit.  "  College,"  (Oaths),  and  post,  tit.  "  Restoration  Returns). 

\q)  12  Mod.  601,  supra.  R.  v.  Slatford,  5  Mod.  317.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  2 
Salk.  429.  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Mod.  233.  See  tits.  "College,"  (Oaths), 
"  Office,"  (Restoration  Return  Oaths). 

(r)  R.  V.  Leeds  (Mayor),  11  A.  &  E.  512  ;f  5  Jur.  548.  And  sec  stats.  11  Geo. 
1,  c.  4,  and  1  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  26.  See  tits.  "  Alderman,"  (Duties,  &c.)  "  Corporation 
Municipal."  (Duties),  "  Vote." 


150  tapping's    mandamus. 

So  the  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  a  freeman  to  take  upon  him- 
self the  office  of  common  councilman,  although  he  had  uot  taken  the 
Sacrament  within  a  year  before  his  election. (.s) 

.]     lidurn. — A  return  of  a  bye-law  that  persons  who  refuse  to  fill 

the  office  become  subject  to  the  payment  of  a  fine  certain,  and  that  the 
defendant  had  paid  the  fine;  is  bad,  if  it  do  not  state  such  payment  to  be 
in  lieu  of  service. (<) 

.]     Restoration. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  restitution  to  the 

office  and  privileges  of  a  common  councilman  or  councillor,  if  unlawfully 
deprived. (i/)  But  if  the  applicant  be  merely  suspended  from  his  office, 
the  Court  will  not,  it  seems,  grant  a  mandamus  to  restore  him.(t') 

.     Form  of  writ. — The  restitution   of  one  person  only  must  be 

sought  by  the  same  writ,  unless  the  two  or  more  make  but  one  officer. 
Thus,  in  a  case  where  nine  were  sought  to  be  restored  by  the  same  writ, 
Holt,  C.  J.,  in  quashing  the  writ,  said,  "  the  amotion  of  one  is  not  the 
amotion  of  another,  their  interests  are  several,  and  they  may  have  been 
removed  for  several  diiferent  causes,  one  for  one  fault,  and  another  for 
anothcr."(w) 

.]     Returns. — The  return   of  a  custom  to  remove  ab  libitum  is 

good,  because  the  office  of  councillor,  unlike  that  of  alderman,  is  merely 
collateral  to  the  corporation;  such  custom  however  must  be  returned 
r*in91  ^^^^  certainty,  (x)  *But  a  return  that  the  prosecutor  had  spoken 
scandalous  words  of  the  mayor,  &c.,  is  bad,  unless  the  ■words  so 
spoken  had  relation  to  the  duty,  &c.  of  such  officer  :  Lord  Hale  required 
returns  of  this  nature  to  be  sworn,  which  was  the  course  pursued  in  Med- 
dlicot's  case.(j/)     So  a  return  that  the  common  councilmen  should  be 

(s)  See  ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Walker,  6  M.  &  S.  211.  R.  v.  Bower,  1  B.  &  C.  585.t 
S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  842.f  See  tits.  "  Alderman,"  (Duties),  "  Corporation  Municipal," 
(Duties),  "Office."  (Enforcing  Duties.) 

{()  1  B.  &  C.  585.f  S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  842,f  supra.  See  tits.  "  Corporation  Mu- 
nicipal," (Bye-law),  "Return,"  (Certainty). 

(w)  Estwick's  case.  Sty.  32,  (this  was  a  writ  of  restitution,  ante,  p.  3).  Jaye's 
case,  1  Vent.  302.  S.  C.  3  Keb.  714.  R.  v.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233,  234,  16.  R.  v. 
Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  723,  approved  in  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  181. 
Anon.,  2  Salk.  436,  19.  R.  v.  Coventry  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  430.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym. 
391.  Bret's  case,  Comb.  214.  R.  v.  Chester '(Mayor)  Comb.  307.  S.  C.  5  Mod. 
10.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  230.  S.  C.  Holt,  438,  and  cases  there  cited.  Warren's  case,  2 
Rolle,  112.  S.  C.  Cro.  Jac.  540,  and  cases  there  cited ;  also  cited  in  note  to  Mid- 
dleton's  case  in  Dyer,  332  b.  R.  v.  Tyther,  2  Keb.  250.  William's  case,  2  Keb. 
558.  Earle's  case,  Carth.  173.  R.  v.  Chichester  (Mayor),  1  Show.  273,  and  cases 
there  cited.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  6  A.  &  E.  349.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  474.f  See 
Cowp.  502;  2  T.  R.  541,  560.  '  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  506,  where  see  form  of  writ.  See 
tit.  "Office,"  (Restoration). 

{v)  R.  V.  Tyther,  2  Keb.  250.     But  see  tit.  "  Office,"  (Suspension). 

(w)  Anon.,' 2  Salk.  436,  19,  and  cases  cited.  R.  v.  Chester  (Mayor),  Comb.  308. 
S.  C.  5  Mod.  11.     See  post,  tit.  "Writ,"  (Mandatory  Clause). 

(x)  2  Salk.  430,  supra,  and  cases  there  cited.  Warren's  case,  2  Roll.  112.  S.  C. 
Cro.  Jac.  540,  also  cited  in  note  to  Middleton's  case,  2  Dyer,  332  b.  Dighton's  case, 
1  Vent.  77,  82  ;  5  Mod.  11,  per  Eyre,  J.  See  tits.  "  Alderman,"  "Custom,"  "  Of- 
fice," (Will),  "  Town  Clerk." 

(y)  Jay's  case,  1  Vent.  302.  S.  C.  3  Keb.  714.  R.  v.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233,  16. 
R.  V.  Rogers,  2  Salk.  425,  426.  See  tits.  "  Alderman,"  (Restoration  Return  Libel), 
"Office,"  (Restoration  Return  Libel). 


COUNTY. 


151 


chosen  yetirly,  and  that  before  the  coming  of  the  writ  they  had  been  so 
chosen,  had  continued  for  a  year,  and  had  been  afterwards  duly  amoved 
from  their  offices  by  the  election  of  others,  is  bad  for  uncertainty;  for  it 
should  have  shown  the  time  when  they  were  elected,  in  order  that  the 
Court  might  see  that  such  officers  had  not  been  amoved  before  the  year 
expired.  (.-) 

.]     Removal. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  a  municipal 

corporation  to  assemble  and  consider  the  propriety  of  removing  certain 
persons  by  name  from  the  office  of  councillor,  if  there  be  vested  in  such 
corporation  a  discretionary  and  not  a  compulsory  power  of  amotion;  be- 
cause in  such  case  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  no  jurisdiction,  unless  the  cor- 
poration be  misgoverned. (a) 

County.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows: — 


County. 

Accounts,  Books,  &c.,  delivery  102 

Inspection      -        -        -  102 

Rate 103 


County. — Appeal 
Treasurer 
Election 
Duties 


-  103 

-  103 

-  103 

-  103 


.]     Accounts,  Books,  &c..  Delivery,  &c. — The  writ  will  be  granted 

to  command  a  county  treasurer  to  deposit  with  the  clerk  of  the  peace,  in 
pursuance  of  stat.  12  Geo.  2,  c.  29,  certain  books,  containing  entries  of 
the  county  expenditure,  notwithstanding  that  the  receipts,  tradesmen's 
bills,  gaoler's  accounts,  and  copies  of  the  county  rate,  had  previously  been 
deposited  with  the  clerk  of  the  peace,  and  also  that  the  books  contain  the 
discharges  of  the  treasurer  and  ex-treasurer  by  the  justices  in  sessions  ; 
provided  the  sessions  be  party  to  such  illegal  detention  by  the  treasurer, 
by  refusing  to  interfere,(6)  because  thereby  the  public  are  kept  from  that 
to  which  they  have  a  right. 

.]     Inspection,  &c. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to   allow  an  in- 
spection ^'of  county  accounts  ;(c)    but  not  till  after   application  j-s^-fQo-i 
for  such  inspection  has  been  demanded  of,  and  refused  by  the 
justices  assembled  in  Quarter  Sessions. (r?) 


{z)  R.  V.  Chester  (City),  5  Mod.  10,  and  cases  there  cited.  See  post,  tit.  "  Re- 
turn," (Certainty). 

(«)  Ante,  p.  12,  13,  kc.  R.  v.  Totness  (Mayor),  5  D.  &  R.  481.f  R.  v.  West 
Looe,  5  D.  &  R.  414. f  And  see  4  D.  &  R.  TeV.  See  tits.  "  Alderman,"  (Removal), 
"  Office,"  (Removal). 

(i)  Ante,  p.  27.  R.  t.  Payn,  1  N.  &  P.  524.f  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  392.f  S.  C.  W. 
W.  &  D.  142  ;  1  Jur.  54.  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  623.  S.  C.  11  A.  &  E.  955.}  See  tits. 
"Accounts,"  "Books,  &c.,"  "Corporation  Municipal,"  (Insignia),  "Manor" 
(Rolls). 

(c)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D).  See  tits.  "Accounts,  Books,  &c.,"  "  Manor  Rolls'" 
and  post,  tit.  "  Application."  R.  v.  Nottingham  (J.),  3  A.  &  E.  500.f  S.  C.  5  N.  & 
M.  161,t  citing  R.  v.  Leicester,  7  D.  &  R.  370.f  S.  C.  4  B.  &  C.  891,t  but  which 
was  much  shaken  by  R.  v.  St.  Marvlebone,  6  N.  &  M.  600, f  and  overruled  by  R.  v. 
Staffordsh.  (J.),  1  N.  &  P.  277.f  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  84,f  where  see  form  of  writ  and 
return.     And  see  5  A.  &  E.  275. f 

{d)  R.  V.  Leicester  (J.),  7  D.  &  R.  373,t  n.  ;(a)  7  D.  &  R.  708.1-     S.  C. 


152  tapping's    mandamus. 

.]     Rate. — It  would  seem  that  the  writ  lies  to  command  the  mak- 


ing of  a  county  rate ;  but  not  to  command  justices  to  make  a  rate  to 
reimburse  two  of  the  inhabitants  their  charges,  in  defence  of  an  indict- 
ment for  not  repairing  a  bridge,  (c) 

The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  to  make 
an  order  for  a  petty  constable  of  a  division  to  levy  a  certain  sum,  by  rate 
upon  the  owners  and  occupiers  of  property  within  the  division,  liable  to 
be  rated  for  the  relief  of  the  poor,  for  the  purpose  of  reimbursing  him  the 
money  which  he  had  paid  for  the  proportion  of  the  said  division  towards 
the  county  rate.(/) 

.]  Rate,  Ajypcal. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  Court  of  Quar- 
ter Sessions  to  enter  continuances  and  hear  an  appeal  against  a  county 
rate.(<7)  So  it  lies  to  command  a  recorder  to  enter  continuances  and  hear 
an  appeal  against  a  rate  in  the  nature  of  a  county  rate. (A) 

.]      Treasurer,  Election. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  Court  of 

Quarter  Sessions  to  elect  a  county  treasurer,  both  though  there  be  an 
absolute  vacancy,  or  the  office  be  full  by  a  void  election. (/) 

.]      Treasurer,  Duties,  &c. — The  writ  of  mandamus  will  not,  in 

general,  lie  against  a  county  treasurer,  as  such,  both  because  he  is  a  min- 
isterial officer,  the  servant  of,  and  amenable  to  the  justices,  whose  com- 
mands he  should  not  resist,  and  also  that  the  specific  legal  proceeding 
applicable  to  him,  on  his  default,  &e.,  in  his  official  duties,  is  an  indict- 
ment, which  being  the  ordinary  remedy,  must  be  followed. (j)  Thus, 
the  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  a  county  treasurer  to  pay  the  keeper  of 
r*l  O-tl  ^^^  *county  gaol  the  salary  granted  to  him  by  the  sessions,  the 
remedy  being  by  indictment.(/»:)  This  doctrine  has  been  soundly 
established  by  a  recent  case,  in  which  the  Court  of  B.  R.  refused  to  direct 
a  county  treasurer,  by  mandamus,  to  pay  a  prosecutor's  costs,  ordered  by  a 
Judge  of  assize,  under  stat.  7  Geo.  4,  c.  64,  ss.  23, 24 ;  Lord  Denman,  in  giving 
judgment,  said,  that  the  first  question  was,  whether  the  Court  should  in- 
terfere by  mandamus,  "  in  the  case  of  an  inferior  officer,  amenable  to 
others,  and  be  pointed  out  that  in  R.  v.  Bristow,  supra,  which  was  also 
the  case  of  a  county  treasurer.  Lord  Kcnyon  had  objected  to  descending 


{e)  Anon.  Stra.  C3.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.)  See  tits.  "Borough"  (Rate), 
"Church"  (Rate),  "  ffighway  "  (Rate),  "Parish"  (Rate),  "Poor"  (Rate). 

(/)  R.  V.  West  Riding,  12  East.  116.  See  tits.  "  Quarter  Sessions,"  "  Constable." 

(^r)  R.  T.  Middlesex  (J.),  1  P.  &  D.  402.  S.  C.  9  A.  &  E.  540.t  S.  C.  2  W.  W.  & 
H.  100.  R.  V.  Buckinghamsh.  (J.),  7  B.  &  C.  S.f  R.v.  Westmoreland  (J.),  10  B.  & 
C.  226,t  and  see  10  B.  &  C.  792.f  R.  v.  York  (J.),  2  B.  &  C.  TTl.f  R.  v.  Surrey 
(J.),  5  A.  &  E.  TOl.f  See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions,"  (Appeal). 

(A)  R.  V.  Stamford  (Recorder),  2  P.  &  D.  72.  See  tit.  "Recorder," 

(i)  R.  V.  Ilerefordsh,  (J.),  1  Chitt.  700.f  See  tit.  "Office"  (Election). 

\j)  Ante,  p.  24.  R.  v.  Payn,  1  N.  &  P.  528.f  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  392.1  R.  v.  Jeyes, 
5  N.  &  M.  lOl.f  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  416,  422,  424.f  S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  325.  R.  v.  Shaw, 
J  T.  R.  549,  which  is  a  very  early,  if  not  the  earliest,  case  of  a  mandamus  against 
a  treasurer.  R.  v.  Bristow,  6  T.  R.  168.  R.  v.  Surrey  (Treasurer),  1  Chit.  G50.j 
R.  V.  Johnson,  4  M.  &  S.  513.  See  tits.  "Newgate,"  "  Office,"  (Inferior  Officer). 

{k)  6  T.  R.  1G8 ;  6  A.  &  E.  397,  400.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524;  3  A.  &  E.  419.t  S.  C. 
5  N.  k  M.  101,1  supra. 


COURTS. 


163 


too  low,  and  put,  as  an  instance,  the  case  of  a  constable.  Littlcdale,  J.,  in 
the  same  case,  also  pointed  out  the  distinction  between  "  a  servant  to  the 
magistrates,  and  a  principal,  who  pays  over  in  his  public  capacity. "(/} 
If,  also,  any  public  officer  refuse  to  execute  any  order  received  by  him 
from  his  superior,  or  any  competent  authority,  who,  upon  such  refusal, 
may  punish  him  by  indictment  for  such  disobedience,  the  Court  will  not 
proceed  by  mandamus  against  such  officer,  but  leave  the  applicant  to  such 
remedy,  not  altogether  because  the  officer  is  too  low  in  degree,  but  be- 
cause he  has  received  an  order  from  competent  authority,  which  can  en- 
force a  fulfilment  of  its  commands. (m) 

Notwithstanding  the  Court  has  always  refused  to  place  itself  in  the 
situation  of  the  magistrates  in  order  to  make  their  officer  perform  his 
duty;  yet,  if  both  the  magistrates  and  the  officer  refuse  to  act,  &c.,  the 
result  of  which  is,  that  the  public  are  kept  from  that  to  which  they  have 
a  right,  in  such  case  the  Court  will  interfere.(«) 

County  Court.]     See  tit.   Court,  Inferior. 

County  Rate.]     See  tit.   County  {Rate). 

Court,  Inn  of.]  See  titles  Advocate  of  Doctors^  Commons ;  Inn  of 
Court. 

Courts.]  The  Court  will  not  grant  the  writ  to  any  inferior  Court,  of 
competent  jurisdiction,  where  there  has  been  no  defect  of  justice. (o) 

*This  subject  has  been  thus  arranged :  First,  as  to  the  several  pjQ5-| 
Courts   Inferior,    and   what   has   been    required    of  them;  and, 
Secondly,  of  Courts  Superior. 


1st,  CoDRTS,  Inferior. 

- 

-     105 

Courts,  Inferior. 

Jurisdiction  of  B.  R. 

- 

-     105 

Municipal 

-     107 

List  of  Courts  - 

- 

-     106 

Piilace 

-     107 

Admiralty     - 

- 

-     106 

Petty  Sessions 

-     107 

Canterbury   - 

- 

-     106 

Quarter  Sessions 

-     107 

Chester 

. 

-     106 

Reading,  Court  of     - 

-     107 

Colchester     - 

- 

-     106 

Requests 

-     107 

County 

. 

-     lOG 

Steward 

-     107 

Delegates 

- 

-     107 

Clerk  of  Papers 

-     107 

Ecclesiastical 

_ 

-     107 

Revising  Barrister     - 

-     107 

Havering  Court,  Essex 

-     107 

Saint  Martin-le-Grand 

-     107 

Lord  Mayor's 

. 

-     107 

Sheriffs 

-     107 

Manor 

. 

-     107 

Southwark    - 

-     107 

Marslialsea   - 

- 

-     107 

Spiritual 

-     107 

See   tits.   "Court,  Inferior"   (Judgment 


[l)  R.  V.  Jeyes,  supra. 

(wi)  6  A.  &  E.  401,f  per  Coleridge,  J. 
Execution),  "  Custos  Brevium." 

(n)  6  A.  &  E.  392.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524,f  supra,  and  sec  supra,  "  Accounts." 

[o]  Ante,  p.  10  ;  Gude's  Cr.Pr.  180;  Anon.  2  Barn.  441.  See  tits.  "Manor"  (Leet) 
"Quarter  Sessions,"  "Courts,  Inferior." 

As  to  Lis  pendens,  see  ante,  p.  23,  and  tits.  "  Administration  "  (Letters),  "  Church- 
warden" (Restoration),  "Will"  (Return  Lis  pendens.) 


154 

TAPPI N  Q    S 

MANDAMUS. 

COCKTS,  iNFKnion. 

Courts,  Inferior. 

Stannaries'  Court 

- 

108 

Case 

-     109 

Stepney  Court 

- 

- 

108 

Rehearing 

-     110 

Thames  Conser 

-ancy 

- 

108 

New  Trial      - 

-     110 

Tolzey 

- 

- 

108 

Judgment  and  Execution 

-     110 

As  to  what  has 

been  requ 

red 

Review  of  Judgment 

-     Ill 

of  Inferior  Courts 

- 

108 

Records,  &c..  Copies 

-     Ill 

Iloldin;^  Courts 

- 

- 

108 

Alteration 

-     Ill 

Returns 

- 

- 

109 

Application 

-     112 

Jury 

- 

. 

109 

Form  of  Writ     - 

-     112 

Tolt 

. 

_ 

109 

2nd.  Courts,  Superior 

-     112 

Plaint 

. 

. 

109 

Queen's  Bench 

-     112 

To  i)rocecd,  &c. 

. 

_ 

109 

Common  Pleas 

-     112 

Hearing 

- 

- 

109 

Judicial   Committee   of 

Privy 

Appeal 

- 

- 

109 

Council 

-     112 

[*106] 


1st.  Courts  Inferior.]  Jurisdiction  of  B.  R. — As  the  Court  of  B. 
E.  has  general  jurisdiction  and  superintendency  over  all  inferior  Courts, 
whether  civil  or  criminal,  so  it  has  the  power  to  compel  them  to  do  any 
act,  which  by  law  they  should  do,  whether  the  obligation  arise  from  a 
charter,  subsist  by  custom,  or  be  created  by  act  of  Parliament :  also  to 
command  them  to  execute  faithfully  all  powers  with  which  they  are  cloth- 
ed, whenever  the  same  are  either  denied,  or  delayed,  and  to  restrain  them 
from  intermeddling  where  they  have  no  jurisdiction.(jp)  Such  a  writ 
does  not,  however,  lie  to  the  Superior  Court. (g-) 

^Wherever  there  is  a  particular  jurisdiction,  created  by  act  of 
Paliament,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  may  command  the  execution  thereof 
by  mandamus,  and  remove  their  proceedings  by  certiorari,  to  see  whether 
they  have  observed  their  authority  ;(r)  because  it  is  the  duty  of  such  Court 
to  correct  the  errors  of  inferior  jurisdictions,  and  to  grant  a  mandamus  in 
all  cases  to  which  such  writ  is  applicable,  in  order  to  prevent  a  failure  of 
justice,  or  a  public  inconvenience  by  a  defect  thereof,(s)  when  it  is  sus- 
pected, on  strong  grounds,  that  injustice  has  been  done  below ;(<)  there- 
fore, before  the  peremptory  writ  will  be  granted,  manifest  injustice  must  be 
shewn ;  thus  as  that  cannot  be  assigned  for  error,  which  is  for  the  advan- 
tage of  him  who  seeks  to  bring  it;(»)  so  in  order  to  support  a  mandamus, 
there  must  be  an  absolute  defect  of  justice  as  respects  the  prosecutor.(y) 
So  the  writ  will  not  be  granted  to  command  an  inferior  jurisdiction  to 


[p)  3  Bl.  Com.  110;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.),  (E.) ;  Sty.  T,  8;  Lev.  186; 
Comb.  158,  450.  Dr.  Walker's  case,  Cas.  t.  Ld.  Hard.  214.  St.  Balaunce's  case, 
Palm.  50.  S.  C.  2  Roll.  106.  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  2  Barn.  410.  R.  v.  Hewes,  3  A. 
&  E.  730,f  per  Littledale,  J.  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  2  Show.  74.  Brooke  v.  Ewers, 
Stra.  113.  Eldridge  V.  Fletcher,  3  D.  588;  1  W.  Bl.  640;  Stra.  552.  See  tit. 
"  Portreeve." 

[q]  Ante,  p.  11  ;  Vern.  175;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.),  (E.)  See  post,  "Courts" 
(Superior),  and  see  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Charters." 

(/•)  R.  V.  Glamorgansh.  (Inhabs.),  12  Mod.  403.  See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament," 
"  Commissioners,"  "Certiorari." 

(s)  Ante,  pp.  10,  11.     R.  v.  Carmarthen  (Mayor),  1  M.  &  S.  696. 

\t)  See  post,  tit.  "  Application."  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  6  T.  R.  104,  per  Kenyon, 
C  J.,  citing  Dr.  Bentley's  case,  3  A.  &  E.  730,f  supra,  per  Littledale,  J.;  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "  Man."  (A.) 

(u)  5  Rep.  39;  2  Saund.  46;  2  Sid.  40. 

(i)  6  T.  R.  110,  supra,  per  Ashliurst,  J. 


COURTS.  155 

give  effect  to  or  sanction  that  which,  though  in  part  valid,  confers  a  power 
to  commit  an  illegality. (««) 

But  though  the  writ  be  daily  awarded  to  Judges  of  inferior  Courts,  to 
give  judgment,  or  to  proceed  in  the  execution  of  their  authority,  yet  it  is 
never  granted  to  aid  a  jurisdiction,  but  only  to  enforce  the  execution  of 
it;  for  it  is  not  grantable  where  there  is  a  specific  legal  remedy. (./)  Thus, 
the  writ  will  not  be  granted  to  compel  obedience  to  an  order  of  sessions,(^) 
because  the  proper  remedy  is  by  indictment. 

The  following  is  an  alphahctical  list  of  the  Courts  Inferior  in  respect 
of  which  the  writ  of  mandamus  has  cither  been  granted  or  denied  : — 

.]  Admiralty. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  has  refused  to  award  a  man- 
damus to  the  Judge  of  the  Admiralty  Court,  to  grant  a  monition  as  to  a 
prize,  because  it  is  presumed  the  Judge  will  do  right. (^) 

.]      Canterhury  Corjioration. — See  tit.  Attorney. 

.]      Chester  Palatinate. — See  tit.  Attorney. 

.]      Colcliester. — See  tit.  Attorney. 

.]     County. — The  writ  hag  been  granted  to  command  the  sheriff 

to  enter  a  plaint  in  the  County  Court,  but  not  a  plaint  in  replevin  for 
damage  feasant. (a)  So  it  lies  to  command  it  to  issue  execution  on  a  judg- 
ment by  default,  committed  by  the  defendant,  but  not  after  the  judgment 
has  been  set  aside,  though  not  at  the  instance  of  the  parties,  if  it  were  so 
set  aside  before  the  rule  for  the  mandamus  was  obtained.  (Z*) 

* .]     Delegates. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the  ^^-,  r.^-. 

Court  of  Delegates  to  admit  allegations. (c) 

.]     Ecclesiastical.     See  infra,  Spiritual. 

.]     Havering  Court,  Essex. — See  tit.  Attorney. 

.]     Lord  Mayor's  Court. — It  has  been  held  that  a  mandamus  will 

not  lie  to  command  the  attorneys  and  officers  of  the  Lord  Mayor's  Court 
in  London,  to  proceed  with  and  dispose  of  a  cause  there  pending. (c/)  But 
it  has  also  been  held,  that  the  writ  will  lie  to  command  the  Mayor  of 
London  to  enter  up  a  judgment  upon  the  Statute  for  Rebuilding  Lon- 
don.(c) 

.]     Manor. — As  to  mandamus  to  the  Manor  Courts. (/) 

.]     Marshalsea.     See  tit.  Attorney. 


{w)  Ante,  p.  16,  n.  (n).     R.  v.  Conyers,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  301,  Q.  B. 
[x)  Ante,  p.  23  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)     See  tit.  "Company"  (Execution.) 
(//)  Ante,  p.  24.     R.  t.  Bristow,  6  T.  R.  168.     See  tit.  "  County"  (Treasurer.) 
(z)  Ante,  p.  105.  Sayer  v.  Newton,  T.,  1  Geo.  2,  cited  in  Dr.  Walker's  case,  Cas. 
t.  Hard.  21'7.     See  tit.  "  Court,  Superior"  (Queen's  Bench).     See  post,  p.  112. 

(a)  Ex  parte  Boyle,  2  D.  &  R.  13,  14.f  See  infra,  "  Plaint,"  and  see  tit. 
"  County." 

(b)  Eldridge  v.  Fletcher,  3  D.  588.     See  infra,  "  Judgment  Execution." 

(c)  Ante,  p.  lOG.     St.  David  (Ep.)  v.  Lacy,  Ld.  Raym.  544. 

(d)  Buxton  v.  Singleton,  3  Keb.  432.     See  tit.  "Attorney." 

(e)  Amherst's  case,  Raym.  214.  S.  C.  1  Vent.  187.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  871.  R.  v. 
Rushworth,  W.  Kel.  287.  See  Stra.  113;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)  See  infra, 
"  Judgment  Execution." 

(/)  See  2  D.  &  R.  I76,t  n.  [a) ;  1  D.  &  R.  148,f  and  6  T.  R.  242;  1  Barn.  59, 
68,  per  Page,  J.     See  tit.  "Manor"  (Leet  Baron). 


156  tapting's    mandamus. 


Munidjial.     See  tit.  Corporation  Municijyal  (^Duties,  &c.){;j) 
Palace.     See  (h). 

Petty  Sessions.     See  tit.  Quarter  Sessions  (^Petty  Sessions). 
Quarter  Sessions.     See  tit.  Quarter  Sessions. 
Reading  Court.     Sec  tit.  Attorney. 

Requests. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  Court  of  Requests  in 
London,  to  hear  and  determine  a  suit  instituted  in  their  Court  of  llcqucsts 
by  the  Chamberlain  of  London,  or  any  other  person. (i) 

.]     Requests,  Steward. — But  it  does  not  lie  to  command  the  late 

steward  of  a  Court  of  Requests  to  pay  over  the  suitors'  money  received  by 
him  in  his  official  capacity,  as  the  money  is  received  to  the  use  of  the 
litigants  alone. (J) 

.]  Requests ;  Clerk,  Papers. — The  writ  lies,  however,  to  com- 
mand the  delivering  up  to  the  clerk  of  a  Court  of  Requests  of  all  papers, 
&c.  relating  to  the  office,  when  wrongfully  withheld  by  a  person,  by  rea- 
son of  his  supposed  election  to  the  office  j  so  that  when  two  persons  are 
contending  for  an  office,  the  right  to  it  may  always  be  tried  by  a  mandamus 
to  give  up  the  papers.  (^) 

.]     Revising  Barrister.     See  tit.  Burgess  Roll. 

.]     Saint  Martyn-le- Grand.     See  tit.  Attorney. 

.]     Sheriffs.     See  titles  Attorney  ;  Bristol ;   Sheriffs'    Court. 

.]     Southicarh  Borough  Court.     See  tit.  Attorney. 

•]     Spiritual. — As,  where  the  Spiritual  Court   adjudicates  con- 

P^-jrvj;,-,  trary  *to  the  Common  Law,  prohibition,  de  non  procedendo  lies, 
so  where  such  Court  omits  or  declines  to  do  that  which  it  ought 
to  do,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  command  it,  by  mandamus,  to  do  its  duty. 
Thus,  if  the  ordinary  will  not  allow  a  will  to  be  proved,  whereby  the  lega- 
tees are  deprived  of  their  legacies,  in  such  case  this  Court  will  command 
him  to  do  justice  to  the  party. (?) 

But  with  matters  of  purely  Ecclesiastical  cognizance,  or  the  mere  offi- 
cers of  such  Court,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  interfere  by  man- 
damus ',{in)  there  are,  however,  cases  of  the  writ  having  been  granted  in 
ecclesiastical  matters,  (n)  So,  where  an  act  of  Parliament  creates  a  tem- 
poral duty,  and  merely  saves  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Court, 


{g)  Stra.  113  ;  1  Vent.  18'7.  S.  C.  Raym.  214.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  8il  ;  Cas.  t.  Hard. 
214  ;  Cora.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.) 

(h)   1  D.  &  R.  527,t  and  infra. 

(/)  R.  r.  Requests  (Court),  7  East,  292,  where  see  as  to  direction  of  writ. 

{j)  R.  V.  Watson,  2  N.  &  P.  505. 

{k)  R.  T.  Hopkins,  4  P.  &  D.  550.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  IGl.f  S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  63, 
Q.  B.,  where  see  form  of  writ.     See  tits.  "Accounts,  &c.,"  "  Books,  &c.'' 

{I)  St.  Balaunce's  case,  Palm.  50,  51.  Blackborough  v.  Davis,  1  P.  Wms.  4G, 
per  Holt,  C.  J.     See  tits.  "Administration,  Letters  of,"  "  Will." 

(m)  Ante,  p.  22.  R.  v.  Coleridge,  1  Chit.  597,1  per  Abbott,  C.  J.  R.  v.  St. 
Margaret's,  8  A.  &  E.  SSO.f  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  IIG.  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  510.  See  also 
tits.  "  Church"  (Rate),  and  "  Office"  (Spiritual),  "  Common  Pleas." 

(n)  R.  V.  Canterbury  (Archbishop),  8  East,  216.  See  R.  v.  Cambridge  (V.  C), 
Burr.  1660.     See  tit.  "Bishop." 


COURTS. 


157 


the  Court  of  B.  E.  is  not  thereby  excluded  from  granting  the  writ,  because 
the  Ecclesiastical  Court  has  concurrent  jurisdiction. (o) 

.]     Stannaries'  Coxirt.     See  2  Keb.  864,  per  Hale,  C.  J. 

.]     Stepney  Court.     See  tit.  Attorney. 

.]     Thames,  Conservancy  of. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command 

the  justices  of  Berkshire  to  hold  a  Court  of  Conservancy,  in  pursuance  of 
Stat.  17  Rich.  2,  c.  9,  for  that  part  of  the  river  Thames  which  lies  in  that 
county ;  because  as  all  complaints  are,  by  the  statute,  to  be  made  to  the 
sessions,  such  a  provision  is  the  prescribed  legal  remedy  for  the  defect  of 
justice.  (/>) 

.]      Tolzey  Court  of  Bristol.     See  tit.  Bristol. 

As  to  what  has  been  required  of  Inferior  Courts. 

.]     Holding  Courts. — The  writ  will  be  granted  to  command  the 

holding  a  Court  for  the  trial  of  causes,  pursuant  to  charter,  act  of  Parlia- 
ment, &c.  Thus  it  has  commanded  the  holding  of  a  municipal  or  borough 
Court(g)  at  the  instance  of  an  inhabitant  of  the  town,  &c.,  notwithstanding 
he  was  not  a  corporator,  and  although  the  holding  of  such  Court  had  been 
long  disused. (r)  It  has  also  been  awarded  for  such  purpose,  although  the 
Court  has  not  been  holden  for  two  hundred  years. (s) 

.     '^Return. — A  return  of  want  of  funds  to  hold  the  Court  t^^^qq-i 

is  no  valid  answer  to  the  writ  •,{t)  but  if  any  good  reasons  exist 
why  the  Court  should  not  be  holden,  they  may  be  returned. («) 

.]     Jury. — As  to  jury,  see  tit.  3Ianor  (Leet). 

.]     Tolf. — The  writ  will  be  granted  to  oblige  an  inferior  Court  to 

pay  obedience  to  a  tolt.(v) 

.]     Plaint. — So  the  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  the  steward 

of  a  manor  Court  to  receive  a  plaint,  and  to  issue  process  thereon,  and  to 
proceed  to  the  hearing  and  determination  of  such  plaint,  pursuant  to  a 
charter,  &c.(w) 

(o)  Ante,  p.  11 ;  8  A.  &  E.  889,  DOl.f  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  IIG.  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  510, 
supra.     See  tit.  "Act  of  Parliament." 

(p)  See  ante,  p.  18.     Anon.,  2  Barn.  441. 

(q)  R.  V.  Wells  (Mayor),  4  D.  562.  R.  v.  Hastings  (Mayor),  1  D.  &  R.  US.f  5 
B.  <fc  A.  692,f  (n).  S.  C.  cited  in  R.  v.  Eye  (Bailiffs),  2  D.  &  R.  175.  176,t  n.  (a), 
and  see  10  A.  &  E.  561  ;f  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)  R.  v.  Havering,  5  B.  &  A. 
691.  See  tits.  "Borough,"  "  Corporation"  (Municipal),  "  Manor"  (Leet),  "  Quarter 
Sessions." 

(r)  1  D.  &  R.  148,t  supra;  5  B.  &  A.  692,  {n).  R.  v.  Ulchester  (Bailiffs),  2  D.  & 
R.  724. 

(5)  R.  V.  Wells  (Mayor,  &c.),  4  D.  562.  In  R.  v.  Hastings  (Mayor),  1  D.  &  R. 
148,1  a  nonuser  for  fifty-two  years  was  held  to  be  no  answer  to  tlie  writ.  So  as  to 
a  nonuser  for  thirty  years,  R.  v.  Havering,  5  B.  &  A.  691;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man." 
(D.)     See  tit.  "Manor"  (Leet  Plaint). 

(i)  R.  V.  Wells,  4  D.  562,  supra;  1  D.  &  R.  HS.f  S.  C.  cited  in  R.  v.  Eye  (Bailiff,) 
2  D.  &  R.  175.176,  n.(a)  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Companj-,"  "  Highway  " 
(Fences),  "  Railway." 

(«)  1  D.  &  R.  148 ;t  2  D.  &  R.  175,  l76,f  n.(a),  supra.    See  post,  tit.  "Railway." 

[v)  Burgh  V.  Blount,  10  Mod.  350. 

(«•)  Ante,  p.  11.     R.  v.  Havering  (Steward),  E.  T.,  3  Geo.  4,  cited  in  R.  v.  Eye 


158  tapping's    mandamus. 

.]      To  proceed,  &c. — So  the  writ  has  been  granted  to  command 


the  Judges  of  a  borough  Court  to  proceed  with  a  cause  pending  in  their 
Court  ;(j")  but  an  application  for  this  purpose  must  be  supported  by  affi- 
davit, as  it  will  not  be  presumed  that  justice  is  delayed.(y) 

.]     Hearing. — The  Court  of  B.  11.  will,  by  mandamus,  command 

all  inferior  jurisdictions  to  hear  a  case  in  the  first  instance,  or  to  receive 
and  hear  an  appeal  which  they  have  improperly  refused  to  do,  and  will 
oblige  them  to  do  whatever  is  incidentally  necessary  to  such  hearing,  (s) 
But  it  will  not  prescribe  the  mode  of  such  hearing  and  determination. (a) 
Thus,  a  mandamus  will  be  granted  to  make  a  rate,  but  not  an  equal  rate; 
for  in  such  cases  the  writ  is  granted  merely  to  set  such  jurisdictions  in 
motion  when  they  have  refused  to  act.(i)  The  writ  will  not,  however, 
be  granted  to  hear  and  determine,  when  the  tribunal  has,  in  fact,  heard 
and  determined,  although  erroneously. (c)  So  where  there  is  a  remedy  by 
appeal,  as  in  the  Stannaries'  Court, (r/)  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not,  by 
mandamus,  command  a  rehearing,  because  there  is  not  a  defect  of  justice. 

•]     Appeal.     See  tit.    Quarter  Sessions  (Appeal). 

.1     ^Case.  See  titles  Case ;  Quarter  Sessions  (  Case) :  Poor 

[*iiO](a,«). 

.]     Rehearing. — Where  a  tribunal  of  competent  jurisdiction  has 

decided  a  case,  the  Court  of  B.  R,  cannot,  by  mandamus,  command  a  re- 
hearing, and  will  refuse  such  an  application  ;  otherwise  it  might  as  well 
call  upon  the  Lord  Chancellor  to  revise  any  decision  he  has  made ;  or 
upon  any  other  Court  to  reconsider  its  judgment.(f)  So  where  the  prac- 
tices of  a  Quarter  Sessions  required  the  appellant  to  begin  by  proving  his 
case,  which  the  appellant  refused  to  do,  whereupon  the  appeal  was  dis- 
missed; the  Court  of  B.  R.  refused  a  mandamus  to  rehear  on  this  objec- 
tion,(/)  and  decided  the  general  principle,  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will 
not  interfere  to  regulate  the  practice  of   an  inferior   Court,  it  being   the 

(Bailiffs),  2  D.  &  R.  176,  n.  (a),  and  citing  R.  v.  Hastings  (Mayor),  1  D.  &  R.  148.1 
See  tits.  "Manor"  (Leet  Plaint),  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Complaint). 

(x)  Curser  v.  Smith,  1  Barn.  59,  68,  cited  in  Cas.  t.  Hard.  215.  R.  v.  Monmouth sh. 
(J.),  4  B.  &  C.  846,1  and  see  1  M.  &  S.  442  ;  3  Keb.  432.  See  tit.  "Quarter  Ses- 
sions" Petty  Sessions  (Justices). 

(y)  Curser  v.  Smith,  1  Barn.  57.  See  post,  tit.  "Application." 

(2)  R.  V.  Hewes,  3  A.  &  E.  727,t  per  Patteson,  J.  E.x  parte  Morgan,  2  Chit.  250.t 
See  also  4  N.  &  M.  583.t  Doug.  191,  3  T.  R.  504.  R.  v.  Fllntsh.  (J.),  7  T.  R.  200. 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)  See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Hearing). 

(a)  Supra,  n.  (a).  See  post,  tits.  "Office"  (Judical  Officer),  "Writ"  (Mandatory 
Clause). 

(6)  3  A.  &  E.  732,f  supra ;  9  A.  &  E.  546.f  R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.)  See  tit.  "Poor" 
(Rate). 

(c)  R.  V.  Treasury  Lords,  10  A.  &  E.  I79.t  R.  v.  Treasury  Lords,  10  A.  &  E. 
374.f  R.  V.  Old  Hall  (Mayor),  10  A.  &  E.  248.t  Ex  parte  Smith,  4  N.  &  M.  58». 
S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  282.     See  tits.  "  Quarter  Sessions,"  "  Compensation  "  (Office), 

(d)  Ante,  p.  10,  21.  R.  v.  Apleford,  2  Keb.  864,  per  Hale,  C.  J. 

\e)  3  A.  &  E.  722,f  per  Denman,  C.  J.,  and  Patteson,  J. ;  and  see  4  B.  &  C.  846  ;f 
IM.  &  S.  442  ;  and  3  Keb.  432.  R.  v.  The  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  2  D.,  N.  S. 
948.     See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Rehearing). 

(/)  R.  V.  Suffolk  (J.),  6  M.  &  S.  57,  and  see  R.  v.  Monmouthsh.  (J.),  1  B.  &  Ad. 
897.-)-    See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions  "  (Appeal). 


COURTS.  159 

sole  judge  of  its  own  practice  ;(y)  but  where  the  practice  of  an  inferior 
Court  is  contrary  to  law,  the  Court  of  B.  11.  will  not  sanction  it,  and 
therefore  award  a  mandamus. (A) 

.]  New  Trial. — The  Court  of  B.  B.  cannot,  by  mandamus,  com- 
mand an  inferior  jurisdiction  to  grant  a  new  trial,  although  it  be  alleged 
that  injustice  has  been  done ;  for  such  a  command  would,  in  fact,  be  to 
try  upon  affidavits  the  truth  of  any  alleged  irregularity  in  a  judgment  of 
such  Court;  besides,  if  the  judgment  be  erroneous,  a  writ  of  error  lies.(i) 

.]     Judijment   and   Execution. — It   is  a  general  rule,  that   the 

Court  of  B.  R.  will  not,  by  mandamus,  enforce  the  process  of  an  inferior 
Court,  the  Judge  of  which  has  power  to  compel  obedience  to  his  pro- 
cess.(iV)  The  writ  has,  however,  been  granted  to  allow  an  applicant  to 
enter  up  final  judgment,  and  tax  his  costs,  in  a  certain  plaint  duly  entered 
by  him  in  a  Manor  Court,  and  to  issue  a  precept  or  warrant  in  the  nature 
of  a  capias  ad  satisfaciendum  thereupon ;  but  such  an  application  will  be 
refused,  if  the  inferior  Court  had  not  jurisdiction. (_;")  So  it  has  been 
granted  to  command  the  Judge  of  an  inferior  Court,  as  the  Sheriff's  Court 
of  London,  to  examine  and  inquire  whether  a  writ  of  inquiry  or  judgment 
was  obtained  by  fraud  or  surprise,  though  strictly  regular  in  form  ;  and 
if  so,  to  set  it  aside,  (/i;)  So  it  has  been  granted  to  command  the  Sheriff's 
Court  of  London  to  proceed  to  judgment  in  a  case  before  it;(/)  and  a  re- 
turn that  the  judgment  is  erroneous,  *is  not  good,  for  it  is  sufficient  ^ 
that  the  Court  below  has  come  to  a  judgment  upon  the  principle  •-  -■ 
that  res  judicata  pro  veritate  accipitur.(m)  So  the  writ  lies  to  command 
a  municipal  Court  to  give  judgment  on  a  verdict,  though  it  had  granted 
a  new  trial,  which  it  had  not  power  to  do ;  the  mandamus  in  such  a  case 
is  in  the  nature  of  a  procedendo  ad  judicium. (72) 

But  where,  in  the  Palace  Court,  a  defendant  had  suffered  judgment  to 
go  by  default,  and  that  Court  had  refused  to  allow  the  plaintiff  to  sign 
final  judgment,  as  by  law  it  was  contended  he  might  do,  the  Court  of  B. 
R.  refused  a  mandamus,  to  command  the  inferior  Court  to  allow  final 


(fi 


2  Chit.  250,f  supra ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions." 
See  ante,  p.  10.  R.  v.  Bettesworth,  W.  Kel.  15G.  See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions' 
(Appeal). 

(«■)  Ante,  p.  23.f  Ex  parte  Morgan,  2  Chit.  250.f  Ex  parte  Smyth,  3  A.  &  E. 
'721.+     See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions,"  infra  (Judgment,  &c.) 

(m)  R.  v.  Conycrs,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  300,  Q.  B.     Ante,  p.  23,  24. 

\j)  R.  X.  Danser,  6  T.  R.  242.  See  Curser  v.  Smith,  1  Barn.  59,  C8;  Andr.  184, 
per  Page,  J.  R.  v.  Oxenden,  1  Show.  219.  Wilkins  t.  Mitchell,  3  Salk.  228.  S.  C. 
Ld.  Raym.  348  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  There  must  be  an  affidavit  of  the  re- 
fusal. See  tits.  "Conviction,"  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Judgment). 

Uc)  R.  V.  Urling,  Fort.  198. 

(Z)  Bayley  v.  Boorne,  Stra.  392  ;  Andr.  183.  R.  v.  Urling,  Fortes.  198.  Smith 
V.  Andover  (Bailiffs),  M.,  11  Geo.  1 ;  Barn.  B.  R.  159;  and  see  Cas.  t.  Hard.  214; 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D). 

(to)  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  7  T.  R.  467.  R.  v.  Old  Hall  (Manor),  10  A.  k  E. 
256.      S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  518.  R.  v.  Richardson,  1  Wils.  21. 

(«)  Brooke  v.  Ewers,  Stra.  113  ;  And.  183.  R.  v.  Day,  Say.  202.  Amherst's  case. 
1  Vent.  187.  S.  C.  Raym.  214.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  871,  also  cited,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  214; 
Com  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  See  also  2  Chit.  250,t  and  4  N.  &  M.  583  ;t  Bac.  Abr. 
tit.  "  Man."  (D). 


160  TArriNa's    xMAndamus. 

judgment  to  be  signeJ,  and  left  the  plaintiflF  to  his  writ  of  error,  which 
was  another  and  a  proper  remedy  in  such  case.(o)  So,  in  one  case,  the 
Court  refused  to  grant  a  mandamus  to  an  inferior  Court  to  execute  a 
judgment  there  given,  because  there  lay  a  writ  de  executione  juJicii.(oo) 
So  the  writ  will  not  be  granted  to  command  an  issue  of  execution  on  a 
judgment  which  has  been  set  aside. (j^) 

.]  Review  of  Judgment. — The  Court  of  B.  K.  will  not  by  man- 
damus, command  an  inferior  jurisdiction  to  review  a  judgment  actually 
signed. (y) 

.]  Records,  Copies,  &c. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  grant  a  man- 
damus to  make  up  a  record,  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  a  party  to  plead 
auterfois  convict,  &c.,  or  for  any  other  proper  purpose  ;(r)  and  also  to 
give  a  copy  of  such  record,  when  made  up,  to  the  applicant's  attorney,  as 
the  prisoner  has  a  right  to  have  the  record  of  the  proceedings  which 
were  had  at  Sessions  correctly  made  np,  and  to  make  what  use  of  it  he 
can.  So  that  if  a  prisoner  be  found  guilty  at  a  Sessions  irregularly 
holden,  he  is  entitled  to  have  the  record  made  up  according  to  the 
fact.(.s) 

.]     Alteration. — The  writ  lies  to  command  an  inferior  Court  of 

Civil  Jurisdiction  to  correct  its  proceedings.  (<)  But  the  Court  of  B.  R. 
will  not  command  an  inferior  Court  of  Criminal  Jurisdiction  to  alter  its 
_^  records  *in  a  matter  which  operates  against  the  subject,  &c.  Thus 
L  "^  it  will  not  command  the  alteration  of  the  minutes  of  a  verdict 
in  a  criminal  case  according  to  the  fact,  nor  cancel  an  alteration  in  such 
minutes  on  a  representation  that  the  verdict  was  erroneously  entered  at 
the  trial. (m) 

.  Application. — The  granting  of  a  mandamus  to  revise  the  sen- 
tence of  another  Court,  is  not  of  course ;  nor  is  it  of  course  to  grant  it 
in  a  doubtful  case,  where  the  Court  below,  assuming  it  to  be  a  Court  of 
competent  jurisdiction,  has  exercised  that  jurisdiction  and  proceeded  to 
sentence,  and  the  applicant  has  appealed  against  that  sentence,  which  has 
been  affirmed  on  such  appeal. (v) 

(o)  Ante,  p.  22.  R.  v.  Conygham,  1  D.  &  R.  529.t  S.  C.  nom.  Arden  v.  Con- 
nell,  5  B.  &  A.  885.  Ex  parte  Morgan,  2  Chit.  250.f  See  also  4  N.  &  M.  SSS.f 
Supra  (New  Trial). 

{oo)  Ante,  p.  22.  Wilkins  v.  Mitchell,,  2  Salk.  228.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  348,  and 
note  there,  contra,  cited  in  Dr.  "Walker's  case,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  212,  217  ;  and  see  R. 
V.  Ely,  (Ep.)  1  W.  Blac.  57.    S.  C.  1  Wils.  266  ;  1  Show.  219. 

{p)  Ante,  pp.   26,   27.     Eldridge  v.  Fletcher,  1   H.  &  W.  199 ;  3  Bl.  Com.  110. 

[q)  See  supra  "Judgment  Execution,  &c."  R.  v.  Monmouthshire  (J.),  4  B.  &  C. 
846.f  R.  V.  Leicestershire  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  442.  Buxton  v.  Singleton,  3  Keb.  432. 
See  3  A.  &.  E.  722f .     See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Review). 

(r)  R.  V.  Middlesex  (J.),  5  B.  &  Ad.  1113.t  R.  v.  Hewes,  3  A.  &  E.  731,t  per 
Littledale,  J.,  &c.  See  tits.  "  Books,"  &c."  "  Conviction,"  "  Quarter  Sessions" 
(Records),  "Corporation,"  (Municipal),  (Insignia),  "Manor,"  (Leet). 

(s)  See  tits.  "Prisoner,"  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Records). 

{t)  Ante.  p.  11.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (.!.),  5  Q.  B.  l.f  S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  170.  S. 
C.  1  D.  &  M.  590;  and  see  3  A.  k  E.  321.f  See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions,"  (Re- 
cords). 

(w)  3  A.  &  E.  725. f  supra.     See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Record.) 

(y)  6  T.  R.  110,  supra,  per  Grose,  J.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 


COURTS.  IGl 

— .     Form  of  Writ. — The  writ  is  always  sent  in  general  terms,  to 

do  its  duty,  and  must  not  require  such  inferior  Court  to  do  a  specific  act 
in  a  particular  modo.(w!)  Thus  it  will  not  be  granted  to  command  such 
inferior  j  urisdiction  to  do  a  particular  thing,  as  to  make  an  alteration  in 
the  clerk  of  the  peace's  minutes,  as  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  no  right  to 
interfere,  in  this  respect,  with  the  practice  of  the  Court  below. (x) 

2nd.  Of  Courts  Superior. 

Courts.]  Superior,  Queen's  Bench. — Though  a  mandamu,';(y)  may 
issue  out  of  Chancery  to  an  inferior  Court,  yet,  on  a  motion  to  the  Lord 
Keeper  to  grant  a  mandatory  writ  to  the  Chief  Justice  of  B.  li.,  to  com- 
mand him  to  sign  a  bill  of  exceptions,  the  Lord  Keeper  refused  it,  and 
observed,  that  he  would  not  presume  but  that  the  Chief  Justice  of  Eng- 
land would  do  what  was  just  in  the  case.(^) 

.]     Common  Pleas,  Officers  of. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  cannot,  by 

mandamus,  meddle  with  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  as  to  its  officers,  &c., 
because  the  course  of  their  Court  is  the  law,  and  of  that  they  are  the 
Judges,  it  being  one  of  the  superior  Courts. (a) 

.]  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council. — As  to  a  man- 
damus to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council,  see  tit.  Privy 
Council. 

Crown.]  It  is  clearly  settled,  that  the  writ  of  mandamus  cannot,  in 
any  case,  be  granted  against  the  King  or  Queen,  both  because  there  would 
be  an  incongruity  in  the  Sovereign  commanding  itself,  and  also,  because 
*disobedience  to  the  writ  must  be  enforced  by  attachment. fi)      ,,,^ 

r  113  1 

Neither  will  the  writ  lie  to  command  the  officers  or  servants  of  ^  J 

the  Crown,  as  such.(c)  Thus  it  does  not  lie  to  command  the  Crown  or 
its  servants,  strictly  as  such,  being  the  depositories  of  public  money,  &c., 
either  to  pay  over  money  in  its  or  their  possession,  in  liquidation  of  legal 


(w)  Ante,  p.  109.  R.  v.  Suffolk  (J.),  5  N.  &  M.  144,f  per  Patteson,  J.  See  post, 
tit.  "Writ"  (Mandatory  Clause.) 

[x)  R.  V.  Hewes,  3  A.  &  E.  V31,f  per  Littledale,  J.,  and  per  Patteson,  J.,  1Z2. 
Blackborough  v.  Davis,  1  P.  Wms.  4G.  R.  v.  Leicestersh.  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  444.  Ex 
parte  Morgan,  2  Chit.  250  ;f  and  see  4  N.  &  M.  SSS.f  R.  v.  Suffolk  (.J.),G  M.  &  S. 
57  ;  and  see  R.  v.  Monmouthsh.  (J.),  1  B.  &  Ad.  SOT.f  See  tit.  "Office"  (Judi- 
cial). 

(?/)  Ante,  p.  1,  n.  («). 

\z)  Rioter's  case,  1  Vcrn.  175.     See  supra,  tit.  "Admiralty  Court." 

(ff)  Adra.  in  R.  v.  Oxenden,  1  Show.  218.  See  tits.  "Proctor,"  Office"  (Officers 
of  Courts  Inferior).     Ante,  p.  105. 

[b)  R.  r.  Treasury  (Lords),  4  A.  &  E.  286,  295.f  R.  v.  Powell,  4  P.  &  D.  719. 
S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  352.1     See  tit.  "Treasury  Lords,"  and  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

(c)  4  A.  &  E.  286,  295, f  supra.  In  re  De  Bode,  6  U.  776.  S.  C.  1  W.  W.  &  H. 
332.  " 

April,  1852.— 11 


162  tapping's    mandamus. 

and  valid  claims  ;((/)  or  to  deliver  up  goods  wrongfully-  detained. (r;)  Nor 
does  the  writ  lie  to  coniuiand  the  steward  of  a  royal  manor  to  admit  a 
tenant,  tlinngh  such  steward  may  have  received  his  appointment  from  the 
Commii5-;ion'>rs  of  Woods  and  Forests,  under  stat.  10  Geo.  4,  c.  50,  s. 
14;  for  such  statute  docs  not  divest  the  Crown  of  its  legal  estate. (/) 

Curacy.]     See  tit.  Curate. 

Curate.]     The  writ  lies  for  a  curate. (7) 
This  sultject  has  been  arranged  as  follows : — 


Curate 

- 

- 

113 

Curate. 

Admission 

- 

- 

113 

Perpetual  Curacy 

. 

-    114 

Licensing 

- 

- 

113 

Nomination   - 

. 

-    114 

Restoration    - 

- 

. 

113 

Admission     - 

_ 

-    114 

AUGMKNTED  CuUACY 

- 

- 

114 

Stipendiary  Curacy 

- 

-     114 

License 

- 

- 

114 

Nomination,  &c. 

- 

-     114 

.1     Atfmianon 

-The 

writ  lies  to  command  the 

admission  of  a 

curate  to  his  ch;ipel.(/;) 

.]     Licensing. — As  to  licensing  a  curate,  see  tit.  Lectureship. (t) 

.]     Restoration. — As  mandamus  is  the  most  proper  and  eflfectual 

remedy  to  restore  a  curate  to  his  chapel,  in  which  he  has  a  temporal 
right,  therefore  the  Court  will  award  the  writ  for  that  purpose. (y)  By  it 
the  right  to  officiate  in  chapels,  whether  it  depend  on  nomination  or 
election,  can  alone  be  tried;  for  chapels  were  not  objects  of  attention  in 
the  days  when  the  register  was  formed,  and  therefore  there  is  no  par- 
j.^-.-..-,  ticular  remedy  *provided  as  to  them.  Tmis  the  writ  has  been 
granted  to  restore  the  curate  of  a  chapel,  being  a  donative,  endowed 
with  lauds,  he  having  been  appointed,  licensed,  and  in  possession,  but  after- 
wards tui-ned  out  by  force  •,(k)  there  being  no  other  legal  remedy,  applicable 
to  such  a  case,  for  neither  ejectment  nor  trespass  (assuming  a  curate  has  the 
legal  property  in  his  curacy  and  can  bring  these  actions)  would  be  a  specific 

(d )  4  A.  k  E.  286,  295,t  supra.     S.  C.  6  D.  llG.f     S.  C.  1  W.  W.  &  H.  332. 

[e)  R.  V.  Customs  (Commrs.),  6  N.  &  M.  828.f  S.  C.  5  A.  &  E.  380.f  See  tit. 
"Customs." 

(/)  R.  v.  Powell,  4  P.  &  D.  119.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  352.f  See  tit.  "Manor,"  (Royal 
Manor.) 

(.(/)  It  has,  however,  been  refused  to  command  the  licensing  of  a  second  curate, 
although  it  was  shown  that  one  was  not  sufficient,  &c.,  the  Court,  in  its  judgment, 
said  tliat  there  did  not  appear  to  be  any  such  office  as  a  second  curate ;  that 
there  was  no  trace  of  any  such  office  in  the  'books,  and  that  the  Court  could  not 
grant  a  mandamus  for  an  office  in  fieri.  Anon.  2  CJiit.  253. f  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 
(C.)     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Known  to  the  Law). 

(h)  R.  V.  Barker,  Burr.  1268,  per  Ld.  Mansfield,  C.  J.  See  tits.  "Dissenters," 
"Office"  (Admission). 

(i)  7  East,  345  ;  1  T.  R.  396  ;  7  East,  600  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit."  Man."  (C).  See  tit. 
"  License." 

(y)  R.  V.  Barker,  1  W.  Blac.  299,  352.  S.  C.  Burr.  1265,  1267.  R.  v.  Blooer, 
Burr.  1043,  also  cited  in  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396,  and  in  R.  v.  Stafford  (Mar- 
quis), 3  T.  R.  650.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (C).     See.tit.  "Dissenters." 

(k)  Burr,  1044,  1047,  supra. 


CURATE.  163 

legal  remedy  to  restore  him  to  bis  pulpit,  and  quiet  him  in  the  exercise 
of  his  function  and  office. (?)  So  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  to 
command  the  restoration  of  the  possession  of  a  chapel  or  of  a  mceting- 
housc(m) ;  but  not  of  a  parochial  church,  because,  there  exists  another 
specific  legal  remedy,  viz.  by  quare  impedit.(ji) 

.]  Augmented  Curacy,  License. — The  Court  will  not  grant  a  man- 
damus to  command  a  bishop  to  license  the  curate  of  an  augmented  curacy, 
where  there  is  a  cross  nomination,  because  in  such  case  the  party  has  an- 
other specific  legal  remedy,  viz.  by  quare  impcdit.(o)  The  Court  has  in- 
timated, that  the  next  rule  obtained  for  this  purpose  without  foundation 
will  be  dismissed  with  costs.(p) 

.]     Perpetual  Curacy. — The  Court  will  interfere  by  mandamus 

in  the  cases  of  perpetual  curates,  (g-) 

.]     Nomination. — The  writ  lies  to  command   churchwardens  to 

call  a  meeting  of  their  parishioners,  in  order  to  nominate  me  to  the 
bishop,  in  order  to  be  liscensed  by  him  as  a  perpetual  curate  of  a  curacy ; 
and  that  the  churchwardens  should  join  in  such  nomination. (r) 

.]     Admission. — But  with  regard  to  admission,  if  a  quare  impedit 

lie,  then  a  mandamus  does  not ;  for  no  case  is  proper  for  a  mandamus,  ' 
but  when  there  is  no  other  specific  legal  remedy. (.s) 

.1      Stipendiary    Curacy,    Nomination,    &c. — The  writ     lies    to 

command  the  presentment  to  the  ordinary  of  the  nomination  and  appoint- 
ment of  a  stipendiary  curate,  in  order  that  he  may  obtain  a  license  from 
such  ordinary. (/)  But  not  if  there  be  another  specific  legal  remedy,  either 
in  equity  or  law,  as  by  quare  impedit.  (w) 

Custom.]     ^Presentment. — This  writ  lies  to  command  the  ten-  ^ 

ants  of  a  manor  to  present  a  manorial  custom. (f) 

{!)  Ante,  pp.  20,  21  ;  Burr.  1044,  1047,  supra.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.) 

(m)  1  W.  Blac.  300,352.  S.  C.  Burr.  1265,  supra.  See  tits.  "Chapel,"  "  Dissenters." 

(m)  Ante,  p.  26.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  1  W.  Blac.  551.  S.  C.  Burr.  1B47.  See 
tit.  "  Parson." 

(o)  Ante,  p.  26.  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396.  R.  v.  St.  Peter,  12  A  <te  E. 
526.t  Clarke  V.  Sarum  (Kp.),  Stra.  1082,  n.  (1),  3rd  edit.f  Bowell  v.  Millbank, 
1  T.  R.  399,  n.  (</),  per  Mansfield,  C.  J  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  25,  n.  (o).  And 
see  Anon.,  1  Dyer,  48,  pi.  17,  as  to  quare  impedit  by  a  party  having  the  nomi- 
nation. 

[p]  1  T.  R.  396,  supra.  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  159.  See  post, 
tit.  "  Costs." 

{q)  See  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  132.  R.  v.  SafTord  (.Marquis),  3 
T.  R.  64G. 

(r)  Faulkner  v.  Elger  and  Another,  6  D.  &  R.  518.f     See  tit.  "  Churchwarden." 

(s)  Ante  p.  26.  Bowell  v.  Milbank,  1  T.  R.  399,  n.  (d),  per  Lord  Mansfield,  G. 
J.  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  25  n.  (o).  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396. 
Clarke  v.  Sarum  (Ep.),  Stra.  1082,  n.  (1),  3rd  edit. 

{()  R.  V.  Stafford  (Marquis),  3  T.  R.  646.  R.  v.  St.  Peter,  12  A.  &  E.  526.1  See 
tits.  "  Lectureship,"  "  License." 

(m)  Ante,  pp.  18—26;  3  T.  R.  646,  supra.  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396. 
And  see  1  W.  Blac.  22.     S.  C.  1  Wils.  206.  See  tit.  "  Application." 

[v)  R.  V.  Montacute  (Ld.),  1  W.  Blac.  60.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.  See  tit.  "  Manor." 
See  1  B.  &  C.  565,f  for  return  of  such  a  custom.  See  tits.  "  Manor,"  (Custom  Li- 
cense), "  Presentment." 


154  tapping's   mandamus. 

.]     Enforcing  Observance. — As  on  the  one  hand  the  writ  lies  to 


enforce  a  legal  custom, (?/')  so  on  the  other  hand  the  Court  will  not  grant 
the  writ  to  command  the  doing  of  an  act  in  opposition  to  a  long  continued 
usage,  (x) 

Where  an  application  is  made  for  a  mandamus,  and  the  question  turns 
upon  a  custom,  the  existence  of  which  the  parties  litigant  desire  to  have 
tried,  the  Court  will  either  grant  the  writ  for  that  purpose,  or  direct  an 
issue. (y) 

As  to  the  certainty  in  stating  a  custom  in  a  return. (2) 

Customs.]  Duties  of  Commissioners. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  com- 
mand the  Commissioners  of  Customs,  &c.,  although  they  act  wrongfully 
by  withholding  goods,  or  by  the  doing  of  any  other  tortious  act ;  for,  to 
grant  a  mandamus  in  such  case,  wouH  be  in  effect  to  grant  the  writ 
against  the  Crown  or  its  officers,  which  legally  cannot  be. (a)  Independ- 
ently of  such  objection,  the  Court  will  not  compel  the  commissioners  to 
deliver  up  goods  placed  rightfully  in  their  custody,  to  secure  the  duty,  on 
a  suggestion  that  the  full  amount  thereof  has  been  since  tendered  or  paid, 
and  therefore  the  goods  wrongfully  detained;  for  either  the  officer  is  jus- 
tified or  not ;  if,  therefore,  he  be  justified,  there  is  no  grievance,  but  if  he 
be  not,  a  mandamus  is  not  the  proper  remedy,  but  an  action  \?,.{l>) 
The  Court  has,  by  mandamus,  commanded  justices  to  proceed  to  judg- 
ment on  an  information  of  a  seizure,  under  stat.  6  Geo.  1  c.  21. (c) 

As  to  registry  of  ship,  see  tit.  /S'/i^p. 

Cu.sTOS  Brevium.]  Cleric,  Restoration. — The  writ  lies  not  to  restore 
a  clerk  to  his  place  in  the  office  of  the  Custos  brevium ;  the  Court  say- 
ing, "  that  the  master  of  the  office  is  answerable  for  all  his  clerks,  and 
liatli  power  over  *them,  and  they  are  not  officers,  but  mere  ser- 
L  J  vauts,  and  therefore  there  is  no  remedy  to  be  had  in  law  against 
him."((/) 

Cu.sTOS  RoTULORUM.]     See  tit.  Peace  {Clerk  of). 

{w)  R.  V.  Pickles,  3  Q.  B.  599,f  n.  (a).     See  tit.  "  Churchwarden." 

(x)  K.  V.  Chester  (Mayor),  1  M.  k  S.  101  ;  1  T.  R.  423  ;  2  T.  R.  2.  Sec  tits. 
"License,"  "  xManor,"  (License). 

iy)  R.  V.  London  (P^p.),  1  T.  R.  3.33. 

(z)  Protector  v.  Kingston-upon-Thames,  Sty.  479,  478,  481  ;  and  Waggoner's 
case  there  cited.  R.  v.  Coventry  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  430.  R.  v.  Pickles,  3  Q.  B. 
599  ;((i')t  and  see  post,  tit.  "  Return," 

(a)  R.  V.  C  istoms  (Commissioners),  1  N.  &  P.  536.f  S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  828.t  S. 
C.  5  A.  &  E.  322,1  per  LitthMlale,  J. ;  also  cited  in  R.  v.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  39G.t  S. 
C.  1  N.  &  P.  .^)24  ;f  2  n.  &  W.  247.     See  tit.  "  Crown," 

(6)  Ante,  p.  20.  R.  v.  Customs  (Commissioners),  5  A.  &  E.  322,f  per  Lord  Den- 
man,  C.  J.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  536.t  S.  C.  2  H.  &  W.  24Y.  S.  C.  6N.  &  M.  828  ;t  2 
Sclw.  N.  P.  Replevin  I,  p.  1184,  (ed.  8.)  Whitelegg  v.  Richards,  3  B.  &  B.  188,-f 
in  error.     S   C.  2  B.  &  C.  45  ;t  and  see  Barry  v.  Arnaud,  10  A.  &  E.  656.1 

(c)  R.  V.  Tod,  Stra.  530.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  ''Man."  (A.)  See  tits.  "Courts  Infe- 
nor"  (.  ud/.UL'nl),  'Quarter  Sessions"  (Judgment). 

fd)  V,  hltechurch  v.  Paget,  Sty.  208.  See  tits.  "County"  (Treasurer),  "Office," 
(Officer  Of  Courts). 


DEAN,     ETC.  165 

Cutler's  Company,  Court  of  Assistants  in.]  Restoration. — The 
writ  lies  to  command  a  restoration  of  one  to  bo  one  "  in  the  Court  of  As- 
sistants of  the  Company  of  Cutlers."(e) 

Damages.]  See  titles  Compaiiy;  Compensation  (Assessing);  Courts 
In/erioi-  (^Damages). 

Dead.]     See  titles  Burial ;    Corpse. 

Dean.]     The  writ  lies  for  the  office  or  function  of  dean.(/) 

.]     Election,  Admission ,  &c. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  the 

election  and  admission  of  a  prebendary  to  be  dean.^//)  It  also  lies  to 
elect  one  a  canon  residentiary,  in  order  to  qualify  him  for  election  as 
dean,  and  then  to  elect  him  into  that  office. (/i) 

Dean  and  Chapter.]  Clerk,  Restoration. — The  Court  has  denied 
the  writ  to  restore  a  clerk  of  a  dean  and  chapter,  for  he  is  not  a  public 
officer,  his  duty  being  merely  to  enter  leases,  &c.(i') 

.]     Register. — The  writ  does  not  lie  for  the  office  of  register  of  a 

dean  and  chapter,  unless  there  be  an  affidavit  that  they  have  ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction.  (J) 

Dean  of  the  Arches.]     See  tit.  Advocate  of  Doctors^  Commons. 

Delegates'  Court.]     See  tit.  Court  Inferior  {^Delegates). 

Depositions.]  See  titles  Courts  Inferior  (^Records) ;  Prisoner; 
Quarter  Sessions  [Records). 

Deputy  Officer.]     See  titles  Marches;   Office  (^Deputy). 

*DlGNlTY.]    Title,  Restoration. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  restore  r^^ci  -17-1 
one,    as  a  knight,  &c.,  to   his  dignity,  from  which  he   has  been 
degraded  by  a  Coui't  of  Honour. (/i-) 

Directors.]     See  tit.  Company  [Director). 

[p)  Tl.  V.  Cutlers'  Company,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  129.  See  tits.  "Company,"  "Corporft- 
tion  Municipal,"  (Franchise),  "  Franchise,"  "  Freedom,"  "  Freeman." 

(/)  44  Ass.  9.  Fairchild  v.  Gair,  Brownlow,  201,  cited  in  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb. 
165,  per  Moreton,  J.     See  tit.  "Office"  (Ecclesiastical  Officer),  "  Proctor." 

{g)  R.  V.  St.  Peter's,  4  P.  &  D.  252.  S.  C.  12  A.  &  E.  512.f  See  tits.  "Office," 
(Election  Admission),   "Prebend." 

(//)  4  P.  &  U.  253.  S.  C.  12  A.  &  E.  512,f  supra.  See  tit.  "  Canons  Residen- 
tiary." 

(«■)  Ante,  p.  12.  Dean  and  Chapter's  case.  Comb.  133.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man." 
(C.)     See  tit.  "Office,"  (Public). 

[j]  Ante,  p.  12,  Comb.  133,  supra.  R.  v.  Hill,  Show.  203.  But  see  Bollard  v. 
Jerrard,  12  Mod.  G09.     See  tit.  "Office." 

{k)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (U.),  8  Mod.  149,  citing  1  Lev.  119. 


166 


TAPPINGS     MANDAMUS. 


Discretion.]  The  writ  of  mandamus  lies  to  command  the  exercise  of 
a  discretion  (f) 

.  Form  of  Writ.  Where  the  object  of  a  writ  of  mandamus  is  to 

enforce  the  exercise  of  a  "  discretion,"  the  mandatory  clause  merely,  and 
in  general  terms,  commands  such  discretion  to  be  exercised.  Thus,  where 
a  writ  commanded  the  defendants  to  make  such  alterations  and  amend- 
ments in  certain  sewers,  as  were  necessary,  in  consequence  of  "  the  float- 
ing of  the  harbour,"  it  was  held,  that  such  allegation  was  sufficient,  and 
that  it  was  neither  necessary  nor  proper  to  call  upon  the  defendants  to 
make  any  specific  alteration,  the  mode  of  remedying  the  evil,  being  by 
act  of  Parliament  placed  entirely  in  the  discretion  of  the  defendants. (m) 

.  Kcfiirn.     If  a  return  of  "  discretion"  be  made,  it  should  appear 

by  such  return,  that  the  discretion  of  the  right  party  has  been  exercised  ;(n) 
but  as,  as  before  stated,  the  discretion  can  neither  be  controlled  nor  in- 
fluenced, so  in  such  a  return  the  Court  does  not  require  an  assignment  of 
the  grounds  and  reasons  upon  which  such  discretion  is  founded ;  they 
should  not  therefore  be  set  out ;  the  return  should  merely  state,  that  the 
discretion  has  been  exercised  ;(o)  because  it  is  obvious  that  many  matters 
will  and  may  properly  operate  in  guiding  a  discretion,  which  cannot  be 
the  subject  of  proof,  and  which  ought  not  to  be  subjected  to  inquiry. (p) 
But  if  the  grounds,  &c.  be  set  forth  on  the  return,  and  appear  insufficient, 
the  Court  will  quash  it.{q) 


[*118] 


*DissENTERS.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows: — 


Dissenters 
Minister 
Admission 
To  quality,  &c. 


118 
118 
118 
118 


Dissenters — Restoration 
Meeting-house 
Registration 
Appeal 


-  118 

-  118 

-  118 

-  119 


.]     Minister,  Admission. — Upon  this  subject  Lord  Mansfield,  C. 

J.,  has  said,(j-)  "that  since  the  Act  of  Toleration,  the  writ  of  mandamus 
ought  to  be  extended  to  protect  an  endowed  pastor  of  Protestant  dissenters, 
from  analogy  and  the  reason  of  the  thing.  The  right  to  the  function  is 
the  substance,  and  draws  after  it  everything  else  as  appurtenant  thereto. 
The  use  of  the  meeting-house  and  pulpit  follow,  by  necessary  consequence, 
the  right  to  the  function  of  minister,  preacher,  or  pastor ;  as  much  as  the 


ise  Bank 


(/)  See  ante,  p.  12 — 15,  and  tits.  "Curate,"  "Lectureship,"  "License.' 

(m)  R.  V.  Bristol  Dock,  6  B.  &  C.  181.t     S.  C.  9  D.  &  R.  .-JOO.f    R-  v.  Ous 
Commissioners,  3  A.  &  E.  544. f  See  post,  tit.  "Writ"  (Mandatory  Clause). 

(w)  R.  V.  Ouse  Bank  Commissioners,  3  A.  &  E.  544. f 

(o)  R.  V,  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  117.  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  13  East,-419. 
R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  255. f  R.  v.  Andover  (Burgess),  Ld.  Raym.  710. 
R.  V.  London  (Ep.),  13  East,  419.  R.  v.  Gloucester  (Ep.),  2  B.  &  Ad.f  158.  See 
tit.  "Return."  R.  v.  Canton  (Overseers),  1  Barn.  299. 

{p)  2  B.  &  Ad.  158,1  3  B.  &  Ad.  268, f  supra,  and  see  Ld.  Raym.  1244. 

[q)  3B.&  Ad.  267,274;f  Stra.  115,  supra.  But  see  R.  v.  Canton  (Overseers),  whero 
the  unnecessary  setting  out  of  orders,  &c.,  was  rejected  as  surplusage. 

(r)  R.  V.  Barker,  Burr.  1268.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  300,  cited  in  Doe  d.  Evans  v. 
Jones,  5  M.  &  R.  755.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.     See  tit.  "  Office." 


DISSENTERS.  167 

insignia  do  the  office  of  mayor;  or  the  custody  of  the  books,  that  of  a 
town  clerk."  Thus  it  is,  that  if  the  minister  be  duly  appointed,  and  be 
not  admitted,  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  to  admit  him  to  the  use 
of  the  pulpit. (s)  but  not  if  the  establishment  be  purely  a  private  one.(;) 

,]  to  Qualifi/,  d'c. — So  the  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  the 

Quarter  Sessions  to  admit  one  to  take  the  oaths  of  allegiance,  and  to  sub- 
scribe according  to  the  Act  of  Toleration,  in  order  to  be  qualified  to  teach 
a  dissenting  congregation. (?<) 

.]  Restoration. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  trustees  of  a  dis- 
senting meeting-house,  as  the  Particular  Baptists,  to  restore  to  the  office 
of  minister  of  the  congregation,  and  to  the  use  of  the  pulpit,  if  there  be 
an  endowment  ;(v)  but  the  applicant  must  show  that  he  has  complied  with 
all  the  requisites  necessary  to  give  him  a  prima  facie  title. (»•)  But  the 
writ  does  not  lie,  as  before  stated,  if  the  establishment  be  a  private  one. (a;) 

The  writ  does  not  lie  to  oblige  a  dissenting  minister  to  give  security 
not  to  become  chargeable  to  the  parish,  if  moved  for  on  behalf  of  justices. (y) 

.]     Meeting- House  ;  Registration. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the 

Quarter  Sessions  to  register  and  certify  a  tenement  as  a  dissenting  meet- 
ing-house, *pursuant  to  the  Toleration  Act,  1  W.  &  M.,  st.  1,  c.  18 ;  p..^-,  ,q., 
because  the  duty  of  the  sessions  in  this  particular  is  purely  minis- 1-  ^ 
terial  ]{z)  but  to  such  a  writ  the  justices  may,  it  seems,  return  *'  not  within 
the  qualifications,  &c.,"(2)  or  traverse  any  material  suggestion  of  the  writ,  (a) 

.]     Aj)peal. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  entering  and  hearing 

of  an  appeal  against  a  conviction  upon  stat.  22  Car.  2,  c.  1,  for  keeping  a 
conventicle. (6) 

It  does  not,  however,  lie  to  command  the  justices  of  a  district  to  sufier 
a  dissenting  minister  to  preach  in  a  particular  meeting-house, (c)  for  a 
mandamus  is  always  to   do  some  act  in  execution  of  law,  and  has  not 

(s)  Burr.  1265.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  300,  supra.  Com.  Dig.  tit. "Man."  (A.)  T.  25, 
Geo.  3.  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  201.     See  tit.  "  Institutions,"  (Private). 

{t)  R.  V.  Kendall,  4  P.  &  D.  603.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  366,t  cited  in  R.  v.  Ottery  St. 
Mary,  3  G.  &  D.  383.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  157,  lGO,t  per  Denman,  C.  J.  See  tit.  "  Office." 
(Public). 

(m)  Peat's  case,  6  Mod.  310.  S.  C.  6  Mod.  228.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  5'72  ;  1  W.  Blac. 
300.  S.  C.  Burr.  1265,  supra.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U),  8  Mod.  155.  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"  Man."  (A.)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  See  tits.  "  Allegiance,  Oath  of,"  "  College," 
(Oaths),  "Resiant." 

(y)  R.  V.  Jotham,  3  T.  R.  575;  3  Bl.  Com.  110;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  In  T. 
20  Geo.  3,  it  was  granted  to  restore  the  minister  of  a  German  Lutheran  Chapel ; 
Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  204.  See  tit.  "  Application,"  post. 

(w)  Ante,  p.  28,  114.  See  post,  tit.  "Application." 

\x)  Note  {t)  supra. 

ly)  Peat's  case,  6  Mod.  229.     S.  C.  2  Salk.  572.    Ante,  p.  27.  28. 

{z)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Derbysh.  (J.),  1  W.  Blac.  605.  S.  C.  Burr.  1991.  Sec 
also  R.  V.  Green,  Skin.  670.  Green  v.  Pope,  Ld.  Raym.  125.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man." 
(A).  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)  See  tits.  "Chapel,"  "Curate,"  "Quarter  Sessions." 

(a)  See  tits.  "  Return,"  "  Traverse." 

(b)  Sand.  Obs.  upon  the  Stat.  57,  R.  v.  Southmolton  (Mayor).  S.  C.  Skin.  122. 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)    See  tits.  "  Conviction,"  "  Quarter  Sessions,"  (Appeal.) 

(c)  Peat's  case,  6  Mod.  229.     S.  C.  2  Salk.  572. 


168 


tapping's    mandamus. 


the  same  operation  as  a  writ  de  non  molestando,((Z)  or  an  injunction  in 
equity. 

Distress.  It  is  of  very  frequent  occurrence  at  the  present  day,  to 
coniiiiand  justices  to  grant  a  warrant  of  distress  in  any  case  in  which  they 
projierly  ought  so  to  do;  although  fornierl}'  the  Court  used  to  refuse  such 
applications  ;(r)  and  where  a  remedy  hy  "  distress,"  is  expressly  given 
by  act  of  Parliament,  it  seems  that  the  writ  will  be  granted  to  command 
the  issuing  thereof;  notwithstanding  there  may  be  a  remedy  by  indict- 
ment. (/") 

And  a  justice  will  be  commanded  to  issue  such  distress  warrant  against 
property  of  which  he  is  the  legal  owner.  Thus,  when  upon  an  application 
for  a  mandamus  to  justices  to  issue  their  warrant  of  distress,  to  levy  a 
poor-rate,  it  appeared  that  the  property  in  respect  of  which  the  rate  was 
sought  to  be  obtained,  was  trust  property,  left  by  a  testator  for  the  pur- 
poses of  a  free  school,  and  that  one  of  the  justices  refusing  to  grant  his 
warrant,  was  a  trustee  of  the  estate,  it  was  held,  that  notwithstanding  his 
character  as  such  trustee,  he  was  liable  to  the  mandamus. (^) 

Wherever  there  is  a  remedy  by  distress,  a  mandamus  will  not  lie.((/) 

Distribution  of  Intestate's  Estates.]  See  tit.  Adminhtration 
{^Distribution). 

Dock.]     See  tit.  Drainage.Qi) 
[  *120  ]     ^Drainage.]     This  subject  is  treated  as  follows : — 


Drainage. 

Dr 

VIXAGE. 

Commissioners  of 

-     120 

Hate    -         -         -         - 

-        121 

Swearing  in 

-     120 

Returns 

-        121 

Duties,  &c.    - 

-     120 

Apportionment 

-      121 

Compensation 

-     120 

Books,  &€.,  Inspection 

-     121 

Reimbursement    - 

1          /To«„«,-oc,-/,«^^o 

-     120 

Tf   ia   r.\c 

iQr 

fv<^m    coTr.vo1    «oaoa      +liof    P 

sioners  of  Sewers  are  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  B.  R.  by 
writ  of  mandamus. («) 


(d)  Ante,  p.  10,  and  n.  (/). 

(e)  R.  V.  Kiicks  (J.),  3  N.  &  M.  69,t  per  Littleilale.  J.  See  also  R.  v.  Middlesex 
(J.),  2  Keny.  163.  See  stat.  6  &  T  Vict.  c.  G7,  s.  3,  App.,  and  tits.  "  Quarter  Ses- 
eions,"  (Justices,  Warrant). 

(/)  Ante,  p.  21.  R.  v.  Hants  (.J.),  1  B.  &  Ad.  658.f  R.  v.  Robinson,  Burr.  799, 
and  cases  there  cited.     See  tit.  "  Act  of  Parliament." 

(ff)  R.  V.  Ellis,  2  D.  361.     See  tits.  "Quarter  Sessions,"'  (.Justice),  "  Poor." 

\g)  Ante,  p.  21.     See  tit.  "Compensation,"  (Company,  Judgment). 

(A)  2  Rail.  Cas.  599 ;  6  Jur.  216  ;  2  Q.  B.  64.t  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  286,  where  see 
a  form  of  writ  to  repair  a  dock. 

(i)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Pa^liam  Levels,  8  B.  &  C.  357,  358.f  Cardiffe  Bridge 
case,  1  Salk.  146.  S.  C.  Ld.  Kaym.  580,  and  cases  there  cited.  See  tits.  "  Act  of 
Parliament, '  "  Commissioner." 


DRAINAGE.  169 

.]      Swean'vg  in. — So  it  lies  to  command  the  swearing  in  of  such 

a  commissioner,  appointed  under  a  Drainage  Act.(/) 

.]     Duties,  c&c.  ;  Reparation,  &c. — The  writ  does  not  lie,  at  the 

instance  of  the  Conservators  of  the  Bedford  Level,  to  command  the  land- 
owners to  amend  and  heighten  certain  hanks  within  the  level  which  were 
liable  to  repair  rationc  teuurgc,  and  which  were  alleged,  but  not  admitted 
to  be  in  a  dangerous  state;  because  the  stat.  15  Car.  2,  c.  17,  s.  5,  gives 
the  conservators  within  the  level  the  authority  of  Commissioners  of  Sewers, 
and  therefore  they  have  sufficient  remedy  by  amercement,  in  their  own 
hands. (^■)  But  it  lies  to  command  the  making  of  certain  alterations  and 
amendments  in  sewers,  &c.,  under  adequate  words  in  a  local  act.(/) 

.]  Compensation. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the  sum- 
moning of  a  compensation  jury,  to  assess  damages  for  injury  done  by  rea- 
son of  works  bona  fide  erected  by  Commissioners  of  Sewers,  within  the 
limits  of  their  jurisdiction. (m)  But  it  lies  to  command  commissioners, 
for  putting  in  execution  an  act  of  Parliament  for  draining,  to  issue  their 
precept  to  the  sheriff  to  impanel  a  compensation  jury. (?*) 

.]     Reimhnrscmcnt. — The  writ  lies  to  command   commissioners, 

&c.,  to  reimburse  money  properly  expended  in  repairing  damage  done  to 
a  sea  wall  abutting  on  the  prosecutor's  lands,  but  not  if  it  appear  by  affi- 
davit that  the  prosecutor  has  been  guilty  of  laches ;  as,  by  allowing  the 
wall  after  it  had  *been  previously  presented  for  nonrepair,  to  be  r*j211 
out  of  repair  at  the  time  the  accident  happened. (o) 

.]     Rate. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  Commissioners  of  Levels, 

&c.  to  make  a  rate  to  reimburse  an  expenditor.(p)  Thus  it  has  been 
granted  to  command  such  commissioners  to  make  a  rate  on  all  persons 
having  or  holding  messuages,  &c.  within  such  level,  who  had  had  or 
might  have  hurt  or  disadvantage  by  inundations  of  the  sea,  for  want  of  a 
sufficient  wall  there ;  or  who  had  had  or  might  have  benefit  by  prevent- 
ing such  inundations  ;  and  for  repaying  money  advanced  by  certain  per- 
sons beyond  their  proportions  of  the  expenditure  in  making  the  new  sea 
wall.((^) 

{j)  R.  V.  Kelk,  4  P.  &  D.  185:  1  G.  &  D.  127.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  660-1  S.  C.  L.  J., 
N.  S.  362,  Q.  B.     See  tits.  "  Commissioner,"  "  Office,"  (Swearing  in). 

(k)  Ante,  p.  21.  R.  v.  Gamble,  11  A.  &  E.  69,  72,t  and  notes  and  cases  there 
cited.  S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  2,  Q.  B.  See  R.  v.  Stoke  Damerel,  5  A.  &  E.  584.t  S. 
C.  1  N.  &  P.  56.f  See  R.  v.  Ouse  Bank,  3  A.  &  E.  544.f  See  post,  tit.  "  Applica- 
tion." 

(/)  Ante.  p.  11.  R.  V.  Bristol  Dock,  9  D.  &  R.  SOO.f  S.  C.  6  B.  &  C.  181,1 
where  see  form  of  writ  and  return.  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Dock,"  '•  Nui- 
sance," &c. 

[m)  R.  V.  Pagham  Levels,  8  B.  &  C.  355.f  and  cases  there  cited.  R.  v.  Tindall, 
6  A.  &  E.  150. t     See  tits.  "  Compensation,"  (Company),  "Jury." 

(n)  Ante,  p.  11.  R.  v.  Nene  Outfall,  4  M.  &  R.  647,  ami  see  tits  "Act  of  Parlia- 
ment," "  Compensation,"  (Company). 

(o)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Essex  Commissioners,  1  B.  &  C.  477. f  S.  C.  2  D.  & 
R.  700.t     See  R.  v.  Capel,  10  A.  &  E.  404.f     See  Post,  tit.  "  Application." 

(jo)  Ld.  Raym.  1479.  S.  C.  Stra.  763.  See  tits.  "  Churchwardens,"  "  Expend- 
itor,"  "  Overseers,"  "  Rate." 

{q)  R.  V.  Somerset  (Commissioners),  9  East,  111,  where  .see  a  form  of  writ  and 


170  tapping's    mandamus. 

.]     Jirtunis. — To  such  a  writ,  a  return  by  the  commmissioners  of 


''  tarde,"  or  that  the  writ  was  not  delivered  until  within  four  days  of  the 
expiration  of  their  commission,  and  that  there  was  no  time  to  make  a 
rate,  is  a  good  return.  So  it  is  a  good  return,  that  they,  the  commis- 
sioners, had  made  a  rate  prior  to  the  issuing  of  the  writ,  which,  when 
collected,  would  be  sufficient  and  applicable  to  repay  the  prosecutor. (r) 

•]  Apportionment. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  an  apportion- 
ment amongst  certain  parishes  of  a  sum  of  money,  which  had  been  as- 
sessed by  commissioners  under  a  Drainage  Act.(s) 

.]     Books,  Inspection. — The  writ  lies,  in  some  cases,  to  command 

inspection  and  copy,  &c.,  of  rate  books,  plans,  &c.  But  where  the  Com- 
missioners of  Sewers  for  the  Tower  Hamlets  united  two  levels  which  had 
therefore  had  separate  drains  and  sewers,  and  had  been  separately  rated 
for  drainage  and  sewerage,  and  then  made  a  joint  rate  on  the  united 
levels;  an  occupier  of  property  within  one  of  the  levels  so  united,  with 
the  object  of  obtaining  evidence  in  support  of  a  motion  to  bring  up  the 
rate  by  certiorari  and  quash  it,  applied  to  the  commissioners  for  an  in- 
spection of  all  commissioners'  plans,  rates,  presentments,  decrees,  account 
books,  proceedings,  and  minutes,  relating  to  the  Tower  Hamlets ;  but 
the  commissioners  merely  gave  inspection  of  all  documents  relating  to 
the  rate  on  the  united  level.  The  Court  refused  a  writ  to  command 
them  to  allow  inspection  of  the  other  documents  and  proceedings,  though 
the  commissioners  had  given  the  rate-payers  notice  of  their  intention  to 
enforce  the  rate.(<) 

r*!^^!      3)URnAM.]      "*" Freemasons   of,    Swear,  Admit,   &c. — The  writ 
lies  to  swear  and  admit  into  the  place  and  office  of  a  freeman  of 
the   Company  or    Fraternity  of   Freemasons,  &c.   of  the   City  of  Dur- 
ham. (^7/) 

East  India  Company.]  Duties,  &c. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the 
Court  of  Directors  of  the  East  India  Company  to  despatch  to  the  govern- 
ment in  council  in  the  East  Indies  certain  orders  and  instructions,  in  the 
form  as  altered  and  approved   by  the  Board  of  Control,  if  the   Board  of 

return.  S.  C.  7  East,  70.  R.  v.  Tower  Hamlets,  1  B.  &  Ad.  236,  237.f  R.  v. 
Capel,  &c.,  10  A.  &  E.  403,  404.f  R.  v.  Hare,  13  East,  188.  See  ante,  tit.  "  Con- 
stable." 

(r)  Ante,  p.  15  ;  Stra.  763.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1479,  supra.  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."  D.  3.     See  post,  tit.  "Return." 

(«)  R.  V.  Whitaker,  9  B.  &  C.  G48.f      See  tits.  "Parish,"  "Rate." 

{t)  Ante,  pp.  16,  27,  28.  R.  v.  Tower  Hamlets,  3  G.  &  D.  92.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B. 
670.t  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  231,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Merchant  Tailors,  2  B.  &  Ad.  llS.f 
Burrell  v.  Nicholson,  3  B.  &  Ad.  649.f  Birmingham  Railway  v.  AVhite,  1  Q.  B. 
282.f  See  tits.  "  Accounts,"  "  Books,  &c.,"  "  Company,"  "Corporation  Municipal," 
"  County,"  "  Records." 

(m)  Ante,  p.  12.  Green  v.  Durham  (Mayor),  Burr.  127.  See  tits.  "  Company," 
"Freedom,"  (Company  Swearing  in),  "Freeman." 


EXCISE. 


171 


Control  have  such  right  of  alteration,  kQ.{v)  And  it  also  lies  to  com- 
mand, on  the  refusal  of  the  directors  so  to  do,  notwithstanding  the 
board,  by  taking  the  initiative,  may  itself  send  out  the  same  de- 
spatch, (to) 

Ecclesiastical  Court.]     See  tit.  Courts  Inferior,  and  ante,  p.  22. 

Equitable  Right.]     See  tit.  Trust,  and  ante,  pp.  27,  28. 

Eton,  Provost  of.]  Admission. — The  v?rit  lies  to  command  an  ad- 
mission to  the  office  of  Provost  of  Eton,  if  duly  entitlcd.(x) 

Excise.]  Commissioners;  Permit. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the 
Commissioners  of  Excise  to  grant  and  issue  a  permit  for  the  removal  of 
wine,  spirits,  &c. ;  if  the  same  ought,  as  of  right,  to  be  granted.  But 
the  Court  will  withhold  the  writ,  if  it  do  not  appear  that  the  officer  has 
done  wrong  in  refusing  such  permit. (,v/) 

.]      Conviction. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  Commissioners  of 

Appeals  in  Excise  Cases,  to  hear  and  determine  an  appeal  against  a  con- 
viction by  Commissioners  of  Excise,  as  upon  an  information  exhibited  for 
having  a  private  still. (s) 

.]     Judgment,  &c. — So  it  lies  to  command  the  giving  of  judgment 

in  an  excise  case,  (a) 

* .]     Exportation. — The  writ  li.es  to  command  a  collector  r*]^231 

of  excise  to  administer  an  oath,  under  stat.  38  Geo.  3,  c.  54,  s.  4, 
touching  the  exportation  of  goods,  in  order  to  obtain  a  drawback,  &c.(^) 

.]  Commissioners  of. — See  titles  Admiralty  {Lords  of);  Pen- 
sion. 

Excommunicate.]     See  tit.  Absolution. 

iv)  R.  V.  East  India  Company,  &c.  4  M.  &  S.  278,  279.  R.  v.  East  India  Com- 
pany, 4  B.  &  Ad.  530.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  335. f  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D).  See 
tits.  ''Act  of  Parliament,"  "Company,"  (Duties,  &c.),  "Corporation  Municipal," 
(Duties,  &c.) 

[iv)  Ante,  p.  21.  R.  v.  East  India  Company,  4  B.  &  Ad.  SSO.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M. 
335. f  As  to  enlarging  the  rule  in  order  to  enter  and  try  an  appeal,  see  4  M.  &  S. 
279,  and  the  cases,  supra. 

(x)  Ante,  p.  12.  See  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  14.  See  tits.  "  College,"  (Pro- 
vost), "  Office,"  (Admission). 

{y)  R.  V.  Excise  (Commissioners),  2  T.  R.  381,  385.  R.  v.  Excise  (Commission- 
ers), 6  Q.  B.  975,f  and  981,  n.  (a).  As  to  against  whom  the  writ  should  issue,  S. 
C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  179,  Q.  B.  See  tits.  "Commissioners,"  "Customs"  (Commis- 
sioners). .  ^       .    .      „ 

(z)  R.  V.  Appeals  (Commissioners),  3  M.  &  S.  132.  See  tits.  "  Conviction," 
"Courts  Inferior." 

(a)  R.  V.  Tod,  Stra.  530.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  See  tits.  "  Courts  Infe- 
rior," (Judgment),  "Judgment,"  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Judgment).  And  see  ante, 
p.  11. 

(6)  R.  V.  Cookson,  16  East,  376.     See  tits.  "  Allegiance  Oath,"  "  Oaths. ' 


172  TAi' ping's    mandamus. 

Execution.]  See  ante,  p.  28,  and  titles  Comimny  ;  Courts  Inferior 
(.Tuilijmnit  and  Execution)  •,  Jut](jment. 

ExPENDiTOii.]     See  titles  Drainmje  (Rati-);   Sewers. 

Faversham.]  Free-fisliermen,  Restoration. — The  writ  lies  to  com- 
mand a  restoration  to  the  office  of  freeman  of  the  Company  of  Free- 
lishcrmen  and  Drcdgemcn  of  the  Manor  and  Hundred  of  Faversham,  if 
improperly  removed. (c) 

Fees.]  See  ante,  p.  24,  and  titles  Consfahle;  Coroner;  Lectureship; 
Office ;   Sexton. 

Fellows.]     ^qq  iiilQS  College  (^Fellows)  ;    University;    Visitor. 

Fishery,  Private.]  Appeal. — The  writ  lies  to  command  justices  to 
enter  continuances  and  hear  an  appeal  against  a  record  of  conviction, 
under  stat.  7  &  8  Geo.  4,  c.  29,  for  having  unlawfully  angled  in  a  private 
fishery,  (c/') 

Footway.]     See  tit.  Highway. 

Forcible  Entry  and  Detainer.]  The  writ  lies  to  command  jus- 
tices to  put  in  execution  the  statutes  of  forcible  detainer,  (e)  And  also 
to  issue  their  precept  to  inquire  of  a  forcible  entry.  (/")  But  in  a  very 
recent  cass,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  refused  to  grant  a  mandamus  to  command 
magistrates  to  hear  a  complaint,  and  act  summarily  under  such  sta- 
r*1 941  '^"^^-''"(.v)  Nor  will  *the  Court  compel  the  granting  of  a  writ  of 
restitution  under  stat.  8  Hen.  6,  c.  9,  for  the  statute  gives  a  dis- 
cretionary power,  (/t) 

Forest  Law.]  License  (t). — See  titles  Cowrts  Inferior ;  Lectureship; 
License. 


(c)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Free  Fishermen  of  Faversham,  8  T.  R.  352.  R.  v.  Bum- 
stead,  2  B.  &  Ad.  T05.t  Adley  v.  Reeves,  2  M.  &  S.  53.  See  tits.  "  Company," 
"Franchise,"  "Freedom,"  "Office"  (Restoration). 

(d)  Ante,  p.  11.  R.  v.  Oxfordsh.  (J.),  3  G.  &  D.  349.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  \11.f  S. 
C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  40,  M.  C.  Sec  tits.  "Conviction,"  "Courts  Inferior"  (Appeal), 
"Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

{(>)  Ante,  p.  11.  R.  v.  Montague,  1  Barn.  72.  R.  v.  Long,  1  Barn.  82.  See  tit. 
"  Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices). 

(/)  Anon.,  6  Mod.  139.  S.  C.  6  Mod.  164.  S.  C.  Holt,  407.  Affidavits  of  the 
facts  must  be  produced. 

[g)  Ex  parte  Davy,  2  D.,  N.  S.  24.  S.  C.  6  Jur.  24,  Wightman,  J.,  saying,  in 
refusing  the  application,  that  no  case  had  been  cited  for  it.  See  ante,  p.  11,  and 
tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices),  and  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c. 
73,  s.  3,  App. 

(h)  Ante,  p.  12,  13.     R.  v.  Harland,  8  A.  &  E.  826  ;f  and  see  tit.  "  Discretion." 

(t)  R.  V.  Conyers,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  300,  Q.  B.,  where  see  a  form  of  writ  to  an 
inferior  Court  to  enrol  a  license. 


FREEDOM. 


173 


Franchise.]  The  writ  lies  in  the  cases  of  franchises  of  a  public 
nature  whether  spiritual  or  temporal. (y)  A  franchise  is  in  its  own  nature 
a  freehold,  and  because  it  is  juris  public!,  the  law  has  a  greater  regard 
towards  it  than  any  other  matter  of  a  private  nature. (A-)  Thus  the  writ 
lies  to  command  a  meeting  of  the  mayor,  &c.,  to  approve  a  candidate  for 
a  franchise.(0  So  it  lies  to  command  a  mayor,  &c.,  who  disapproves 
without  cause,  to  approve  and  admit  him  who  has  a  right  to  be  approved 
and  admitted. (???) 

.]     Application. — The  application  for  an  admission  to  a  franchise 

must  shew  an  inchoate  right  and  title  to  it,  as  by  apprenticeship,  mar- 
riage, &c.,  and  thereupon  the  Court  will  interfere  to  aid  him,  and  grant 
him  the  writ  of  mandamus  to  enforce  the  completion  of  his  right.('/() 

Free  Burgess.]     See  tit.  Burgess  {Free). 

Freedom.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


Freedom. 
City. 

Admission    - 
Restoration 
Company. 
Admission 
Rule 


124 
124 


125 
126 


Freedom. 
Company. 

Returns    - 
Swearing  in 
Restoration 
Return 


126 
126 

126 
127 


.]      CiVy,  Admission.— It  is  clearly  settled,  that  a  mandamus  lies 

to  command  an  inferior  jurisdiction  or  officer  to  do  that,  which  it  is  its 
or  his  duty  to  do ;  as  to  command  the  mayor,  &c.  of  a  corpora-  r*;^251 
tion  to  admit  him  *who  has  a  right  to  a  freedom,  as  the  freedom 
of  a  city.(o)     The  rule  is  absolute  in  the  first  instance,  (jp) 

(j)  Ante,  p.  12;  3  Bl.  Com.  110.  Bagg^s  case,  11  Rep.  98.  Awdley's  case, 
Latch.  123.  S.  C.  Poph.  176.  And  see  stat.  12  Geo.  3,  c.  21,  App.  See  tits. 
"Citizen,"  "Corporation  Municipal"  (Franchise),  "Freedom,"  "Freeman." 

(/f)  R.  V.  Bucliiugham  (Corp.),  10  Mod.  173,  174.     See  ante,  p.  12,  n.  («)• 

(/)  Ante,  p.  14,  15.  Green  v.  Durham,  Burr.  127,  where  see  form  of  return. 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.) 

{m)  Green  v.  Durham  (Mayor),  Burr.  127.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  See  tits. 
"Lectureship,"  "License." 

[n]  R.  V.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  5  D.  &  R.  594,  598.1  S.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  677.t  R.  v. 
Physicians'  Coll.,  Burr.  2186.  See  tits.  "  Burgess"  (Admission),  "Freedom"  ^(Com- 
pany), "  Freeman,"  "Office."     See  post,  tit.  "Application."     And  ante,  p.  27,  28. 

(o)  Ante,  pp.  11,  12.  Roger's  case,  T.  18  Car.  1 ;  Rot.  23,  cited  in  Dr.  Dolbed's 
case,  1  Keb.  881.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  872,  per  Twisden,  J.  R.  v.  Eye  (Corp.),  1  B.  &  C. 
85.t  S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  I72.f  R.  v.  Bosworth,  Stra.  1112.  R.  v.  Oakhampton 
(Mayor),  1  Wils.  332.  Townsend's  case,  1  Lev.  91.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  107.  S.  C.  1 
Keb.  458,  in  which  case  a  precedent  of  a  lilce  mandamus  was  produced,  and  a 
similar  one  was  also  stated  to  have  been  granted,  M.  32  Car.  2,  B.  R.     R.  v.  Rush- 


Geo.  3,  c.  21.  App.     R.  v.  Coventry  (Mayor),  3  Doug.  236.     R.  v.  Kmgston-upou- 
Hull,  11  Mod.  382.     S.  C.  Stra.  578.     See  R.  v.  Osborn,  1  Com.  240.     Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "  Man."  (A.)     R.  v.  Ludlam,  Stra.  675.     S.  C.  8  Mod.  267.    See  tits.  "Citizen," 
"Corporation"  (Municipal),  "Courts  Inferior,"  "Freeman,"  "Livery." 
{p)  R.  V.  Coventry  (Mayor),  3  Doug.  236.     See  post,  tit.  "  Rule." 


174  tapping's    mandamus. 

.]      CV(y,  Restoration. — So   it  lies  to  restore  to   priority  of  free- 
dom. (7) 

.]  Company,  Admission.  So  the  writ  lies  to  command  admis- 
sion to  the  freedom  of  a  company. (r)  Thus  the  writ  lies  to  command 
the  admission  of  an  Apprentice  to  his  freedom  of  city  or  company,  (.s)  and 
he  is  entitled  to  the  writ,  although  he  may  have  committed  a  breach  of  the 
covenants  of  his  apprenticeship  deed  by  marrying,  &c.  for  it  is  clear  that 
a  mere  breach  of  covenant,  especially  after  waiver  thereof,  does  not  incur 
a  forfeiture  of  freedom. (0  The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  also,  on  a  proper 
case,  command  all  inferior  jurisdictions  to  do  all  necessary  and  proper 
acts  for  tho  psrfoction  of  the  right  to  admission.  Thus  a  writ  of  manda- 
mus has  been  granted  to  admit  to  an  office  for  enrolling  and  entering  all 
indentures  of  apprenticeship,  and  the  freedoms  of  such  apprentices. (m) 
So  it  has  often  been  granted  to  command  the  town  clerk,  steward,  or 
other  proper  person  to  enrol  indentures  of  apprenticeship  in  the  public 
books  of  a  company  ;  if  such  a  proceeding  be  made  necessary  by  a  bye- 
law,  &c'.,  in  order  to  obtain  a  freedom;  but  the  apprenticeship  must  be 
such,  and  the  apprentice  must  have  complied  with  all  the  rules,  as 
clearly  to  entitle  him  to  such  right. (t;) 

r*l  on       * •]     Rule. — The  rule  to  admit  to  the  freedom  of  a  city,  &c. 

'-  "is  absolute  in  the  first  instance,  (mj)  The  practice  being,  that  where 
the  writ  is  to  swear  or  to  admit,  the  Court  will,  in  case  the  right  appear 
plain,  grant  the  writ  upon  the  first  motion,  that  is,  absolute  in  the  first 
instance.  But  where  it  is  to  restore  one  who  has  been  removed,  the 
practice  is  to  grant  a  rule  nisi  only.(a:) 

.     Return. — A  return   that  applicant  would   not  take  the  usual 

oaths  before  admission,  has  been  held  good.(^)     But  as  a  Quaker  should 

{q)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Trinity  Chapel,  8  Mod.  28.  Roll.  Abr.  481.  R.  v.  Can- 
terbury (City),  1  Lev.  119.     See  tit.  "  Office,"  (Restoration). 

(r)  R.  V.  Rushworth,  Kel.  287.  See  tits.  "Company"  (Bermuda's  Company), 
"  Cutlers'  Company,"  "  Franchise,"  Freeman,  "  Livery." 

(s)  R.  V.  Lincoln  (Mayor),  12  Mod.  190.  S.  C.  Carth.  448.  S.  C.  5  Mod.  399, 
402.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  203,  where  see  a  form  of  writ  and  return.  See  stat.  12 
Geo.  3,  c.  21,  App.  R.  v.  Selby,  5  Show.  154.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  2  Chit. 
144.  R.  V.  Ludlam.  8  Mod.  267.  S.  C.  Stra.  675.  R.  v.  Harrison,  Burr.  1323. 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  '-Man."  (D.) 

{t)  Townsend's  case,  1  Lev.  91,  a  precedent  being  produced  of  a  similar  case  at 
Norwich ;  a  similar  writ  was  also  granted^  M.  32  Car.  2,  B.  R.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  107. 
R.  C.  Raym.  69.  S.  C.  1  Kcb.  458,  470,  659.  R.  v.  Selbye,  2  Show.  154;  and  see 
Green  v."^ Durham  (.Mayor),  Burr.  127.  Com.  Dig,  tit  "Man."  (A.),  sed  vide  (D.)  4. 
Sec  tit.  "  Office,"  (Restoration  Returns). 

(m)  Ante,  p.  11,  12.  R.  v.  Gravesend  (Mayor),  2  B.  &  C.  602.t  See  tit.  "Of- 
fice." 

[v)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Marshall,  2  T.  R.  2.  R.  v.  Tappcnden,  3  East,  185, 
where  see  form  of  writ  and  return.  R.  v.  Coopers'  Company,  7  T.  R.  543,  where 
also  see  form  of  writ,  &c. 

(w)  Ante,  p.  125.     R.  v.  Coventry  (Mayor),  3  Doug.  236.1    See  post  tit.  "Rule." 

(x)  3  Doug.  236.  n.  (a).  Bull.  N.  P.  199.  See  R.  v.  Truro  (Mayor),  2  Chitt. 
257,f  and  cases  there  cited.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

(y)  Stra.  1112  ;  12  Mod.  190.  S.  C.  Carth.  448;  Burr.  999,  supra.  See  tits. 
"College"  (Oaths),  "Oaths,"  "Office"  (Restoration,  Return,  Oaths). 


FREEMAN. 


175 


be  admitted  upon  malcing  a  solemn  affirmation  merely,  instead  of  the 
usual  statutory  oaths, (j)  it  has  been  held  not  to  be  a  good  return  to  say 
that  such  a  person  had  not  taken  the  oaths.(a) 

.]     Sioearing  in,  &c. — So  the  writ  lies  to  swear  and  admit  into 

the  place  and  office  of  a  freeman ;  as  of  the  Company  or  Fraternity  of 
Freemasons  ;(Z/)  or  Armourers  and  Braziers  ;(c)  or  Scriveners'  Compa- 
ny ;(f7)  or  Russia  Company  ;(«)  or  Turkey  Company ;(/)  or  Clothmakers' 
Company  ;(r/)  or  Joiners'  Company  ;(A)  or  of  the  Gunmakers'  Company, 
kc.(i) 

But  the  Court  will  not  interfere  on  behalf  of  a  person  who  has  not 
acquired  an  inchoate  right  to  he  admitted(_/)  by  birth,  servitude,  &c. 
But  if  a  bye-law  of  a  company  make  it  penal  for  a  man  to  exercise  any 
other  trade  but  that  of  the  company,  he  is  thereby  entitled  to  his  free- 
dom of  such  company,(  )  in  order  to  avoid  the  penalty. 

.]      Company,  Restoration. — So  the  writ  lies  to  restore  to   the 

office  of  freeman,  or  to  the  freedom  of  a  company, (<?)  as  the  Cutlers' 
Company,  in  all  cases  of  illegal  deprivation. 

-.]     ^Rctnrn. — And  a  return  to  such  a  mandamus  should  ^^-.(y^-, 

state,  that   the  body  removing   has  proved  the  charge  for  which 

the  prosecutor  was  removed.     It  is  not  sufficient  to  state  merely  that 

he  was  present  when  the  charge  was  made,  and  did  not  deny  it.(w) 

Freeman.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


Freeman. 

Presentation  for  admission 
Admission  and  swearing  in 


Freeman — Restoration 

. 

-     127 

127 

Form  of  writ 

- 

-     127 

127 

Return 

- 

-     128 

.]     Presentation  for  Admission. — The  writ  lies  not  to  command 


(z)  Supra,  Burr,  999,  1004,  1005.  R.  v.  Lincoln  (Mayor),  12  Mod.  190,  n.  (a). 
S.  C.  Carth.  448.     S.  C.  5  Mod.  399,  402.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  20.3. 

(ffl)  R.  y.  Marcli,  P.  33  Geo.  2  ;  Burr.  999 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  4. 

(i)  Ante,  p.  12.  Green  v.  Durham,  Burr.  131.  Wright  v.  Fawcett,  Burr.  2043, 
2044.  See  a  form  of  direction,  Raym.  456,  and  post,  tit.  "  Writ"  (Direction).  See 
tits.  "  Office"  (Swearing  in). 

(f)  Smitli  V.  Armourers'  Company,  Peake,  N.  P.  Cas.  199. 

{d)  R.  V.  Scriveners'  Coraany,  10  B.  &  C.  Sll.f  S.  C.  5  M.  &  R.  543.  See  tit. 
"  Scriveners'  Company." 

(«)  De  \sL  Costa  v.  Russia  Company,  1  Barn.  24.     S.  C.  Fitz.  4. 

(/)  R.  V.  Turkey  Company,  Burr.  943,  947,  where  see  form  of  the  writ  and  re- 
turn (in  this  case  the  prosecutor  was  a  Quaker),  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) 

{g)  R.  V.  Haii^son,  1  W.  Blac.  371.  S.  C.  Burr.  1322.  S.  C.  where  see  a  form  of 
return. 

{h)  See  Burr.  1328,  supra. 

(i)  R.  V.  Gunmaker's  Company,  W.  Kely.  280. 

{j)  Ante,  pp.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Lincoln's  Inn,  7  D.  &  R.  368,1  per  Littledale,  J. ; 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)     See  tit.  "  Franchise,"  "  Freeman." 

{Ic)  See  ante,  p.  11.  R,  v.  Ludlam,  8  Mod.  267.  S.  C.  Stra.  675.  Robinson  v. 
Grosscourt,  5  Mod.  104.     Harrison  v.  Goodman,  Burr.  12;  Burr.  1323,  supra. 

[1)  R.  v.  Whitstable  (Freefishers),  7  East,  353.  R.  v.  Faversham  (Freefishers),  8 
T.  R.  352.     See  tit.  "  Cutlers'  Company,"  "  Office,"  (Restoration). 

(m)  8  T.  R.  352,  supra.     See  tits.  "Franchise,"  "Office"  (Restoration  Return). 


17G  tapping's    mandamus. 

the  inquiry  jury  of  a  borough  to  present  persons  to  be  freemen,  although 
by  custom  they  must  be  presented  by  such  a  jury  before  they  can  be  ad- 
mitted by  the  bailiffs.  Holt,  C.  J.,  stating  that  the  Court  would  grant  a 
mandamus  to  them  who  are  to  admit,  but  not  to  them  who  are  present 
upon  oath;  the  truth  of  a  fact;  not  to  a  jury;  for  it  is  presumed,  that  a 
grand  inquest  will  present  as  they  ought,  and  so  of  an  inquiry  jury. («) 

.]  Admission  and  Swearing  in. — The  writ,  however,  lies  to  ad- 
mit and  swear  into  the  place  or  oflBce  of  a  freemen  of  a  city  or  borough, 
under  stat.  12  Geo.  3,  c.  31.(o) 

But  the  applicant  must  be  duly  qualified,  that  is,  have  an  inchoate 
right  by  birth,  servitude,  kc.{p)  And  by  the  stat.  12  Greo.  3,  c.  21,  any 
person  entitled  to  be  admitted  a  freeman,  who  shall  apply  to  the  mayor, 
&c.,  to  be  admitted,  and  also  give  notice  specifying  the  nature  of  his 
claim  may,  unless  admitted  within  a  month,  apply  to  the  Court  of  B.  R. 
for  a  mandamus  for  that  purpose :  if  he  be  refused  admittance,  and  a 
peremptory  mandamus  be  afterwards  granted,  the  mayor,  &c.  shall  pay 
the  costs.(^) 

.]     Restoration. — The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  restoration 

of  a  freeman  of  a  city,  borough,  or  town,  illegally  disfranchised. (r) 

.]     Form  of  writ. — The  writ,  as  in  all  cases  of  franchises,  should 

r^iooT  *bc  to  re-admit  or  restore  to  the  ^'privilege,"  and  not  to  the 
"      *'  place  and  office"  of  freeman. (.s) 

.]     Return. — Although  it  is  undecided  whether  a  burgess  having 

committed  an  offence  indictable  at  common  law,  together  with  a  breach 
of  his  oath  and  duty,  can  be  disfranchised  previously  to  conviction  of  the 
indictable  offence,  yet  if  it  appear  that  an  indictment  would  not  have  de- 
termined the  matter,  he  may  be  disfranchised  for  the  acts  amounting  to  a 
breach  of  his  oath  and  duty.(i) 

Freemasons  OF  Durham.]  See  titles  Durham;  Freedom  {Com- 
pany, Swearing  in). 

(n)  Ante,  p.  112.  Clithero's  case,  Comb.  239,  also  cited  in  R.  v.  Montacute 
(Ld.),  1  W.  Black.  64.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283  ;  and  see  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  1.  See 
tits.  "Courts''  (Superior,  Q.  B.),  "Jury,"  "Presentment." 

(o)  See  stat.  in  App.  as  to  notice  of  application,  &c.  Green  v.  Durham  (Mayor), 
Burr.  137.  Wriglit  v.  Fawcett,  Burr.  2041,  where  see  form  of  writ  and  returns. 
R.  V.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  Y  B.  &  C.  GSO.f  R.  v.  Montacute  (Ld.),  1  W.  Blac.  64. 
S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.  R.  V.  Stafford,  4  T.  R.  689.  R.  v.  Norris,  1  Barn.  385.  Moore 
V.  Hastings  (Mayor),  Cas.  t.  Ld.  Hard.  353.  R.  v.  Malmesbury  (Alderman),  3  G. 
&  D.  482.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  5l1.f  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  318,  Q.  B.  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"  Man."  (C.)  See  tits.  "Alderman,"  (Election),  "  Citizen,"  "  Franchise,"  "  Free- 
dom" (City),  "  Office." 

(p)  Ante,  pp.  27,  28.     R.  v.  Montacute  (Ld.),  1  Blaclc.  61;   1  Wils.  283,  S.  C. 

(q)  See  stat.  App. ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man,"  (A) ;  but  see  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89, 
s.  5,  App.     See  tits.  "Franchise,"  "  Freedom,"  "Livery,"  "  Office." 

(r)  Ante,  p.  12.  The  Protector  and  Kingston-upon-Thames,  Sty.  477  ;  this  was 
a  writ  of  restitution  ;  see  also  R.  v.  Derby  (Mayor),  Cas.  t.  Ld.  Hard.  152.  See 
tits.  "  Company,"  "  Franchise,"  "  Freedom"  (Restoration),  "  Office,"  (Restora- 
tion). 

(s)  R.  v.  Morris,  Ld.  Raym.  338.     See  post,  tit.  "Writ,"  (Mandatory  Clause). 

(/)  See  tit.  "Burgess."  R.  v.  Derby  (Mayor),  Cases,  t.  Hard.  152,  and  cases 
there  cited,  as  to  disfranchisement ;  but  see  tit.  "  Office,"  (Restoration,  Return). 


GAME      LAWS.  177 

Friendly  Societies.]  Enrolment,  &c. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  -will,  by 
mandamus,  command  justices  at  Quarter  Sessions  to  enrol  and  confirm 
the  rules  of  a  friendly  society.  But  as  the  authority  of  such  justices, 
under  the  stat.  10  Geo.  4,  c.  G,  to  inquire  whether  the  tables  of  payments 
and  benefits  in  friendly  societies  can  safely  be  adopted,  does  not  extend 
to  societies  instituted  before  the  passing  of  that  act,  the  Court  will  not 
command  the  enrolment  of  the  rules,  &c.  of  such  a  society. (m) 

So  it  seems  the  Court  will  grant  the  writ  to  annul  and  make  void  all 
rules,  &c.,  that  are  repugnant  to  the  stat.  33  Geo.  3,  c.  54,  and  to 
allow  and  confirm  all  such  of  them  as  are  conformable  thereto. («) 

.]      Complaint. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  justices  to  issue 

their  summons  to  a  friendly  society,  to  hear  and  determine  a  complaint 
as  to  an  expulsion  from  such  society,  and  to  make  an  order  thereupon. (mj) 
But  the  Court  has  refused  to  grant  such  a  mandamus  for  a  society  which 
had  been  acting  on  rules  not  enrolled  for  upwards  of  thirty  years,  on  the 
doubt  the  Court  entertained  as  to  the  existence  of  the  society,  although 
the  originally  enrolled  rules  had  never  been  repealed. (.r)  The  writ  also 
lies  to  command  justices  to  proceed  to  hear  and  determine  a  complaint  of 
a  friendly  society  against  a  member,  for  not  paying  a  sum  of  money,  pur- 
suant to  the  stats.  10  Geo.  4,  c.  56,  and  4  &  5  Wm.  4,  c.  40.(?/) 

Game  Laws.]  Conviction;  Appeal. — The  writ  lies  to  command  jus- 
tices *at  Quarter  Sessions  to  enter  continuances,  and  hear  an  ap-  r*j291 
peal  against  an  order  of  conviction  under  stat.  52  Geo.  3,  c.  93, 
Sched.  L.  B.  12,  of  the  said  act,  for  using  a  greyhound  for  the  purpose 
of  killing  a  hare ;  without  having  taken  out  a  certificate. (s)  But  the 
Court  will  not  command  them  to  rehear  an  appeal,  on  the  ground  that 
they  rejected  admissible  evidence,  although  an  appeal  be  against  a  con- 
viction under  an  act,  by  which  a  certiorari  is  taken  away. (a) 

Gaming.]       Conviction;    Appeal. — The   writ  lies   to   command   the 


(m)  R.  v.  Somerset  (J.),  1  N.  &  M.  252.f  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "Quar- 
ter Sessions"  (Justices). 

(v)  R.  V.  Staflbrdsh.  (J.),  12  East,  280. 

(w)  R.  V.  Godolphin  (Ld.),  3  N.  &  P.  488.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  338.1  "  Quarter 
Sessions"  (Justices). 

(z)  Ante,  p.  10,  11.  R.  v.  Godolphin  (Ld.),  supra.  R.  v.  Gilkes,  8  B.  &  C. 
439.t  S.  C.  2  M.  &  R.  454.  Ex  parte  Morrish,  Jac.  Rep.  162.  R.  v.  Witham  Sav- 
ings' Bank,  3  N.  &  M.  416.t  S.  C.  1  A.  &  E.  321.f  Battey  v.  Townrow,  4  Camp. 
5.  But  see  now  indemnity  clause  in  stat.  G  &  1  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  App.,  and  tit. 
"  Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices). 

(y)  R.  V.  Shortridge,  1  D.  &  L.  855.  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  TO,  M.  C,  nom.  R.  v. 
Scott.  The  rule  was  drawn  up  upon  notice  of  such  rule  to  be  given  to  such  de- 
faulter. 

(z)  R.  V.  Salop  (J.),  2  B.  &  A.  G94.-|-  Ex  parte  Pratt,  2  N.  &  P.  102.  See  tits. 
"Act  of  Parliament."  "  Conviction,"  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

(a)  Ex  parte  Pratt,  2  N.  &  P.  102.  See  tits.  "  Certiorari,"  "  Conviction,"  "  Quar- 
ter Sessions"  (Rehearing). 

May,  1852.— 12 


178  tapping's    mandamus. 

Quarter  Sessions  to  enter  continuances  and  hear  an  appeal  against  a  con- 
viction for  gaming,  under  stat.  12  Geo.  2,  c.  28  (l). 

Gaol.]  The  writ  lies  to  command  justices  to  take  into  consideration 
the  report  of  a  prison  visiting  justice  respecting  certain  abuses  in  a  house 
of  correction,  and  to  take  measures  for  rectifying  the  samc.(r) 

As  to  the  delivery  up  by  gaoler  of  the  corpse  of  a  late  prisoner,  see  tit. 
Corpse. 

Guardians  op  the  poor.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows : 

Gdardians  op  Poor.  I  Guardians  of  Poor. 

Election         -         -  -  -  129  Appointment  -  -  129 

Duties,  &c.    -         -  -  -  129  Admission  -  -  130 

Clerli  to  Guardians  -  -  129  |  Restoration  -  -  130 

.]     Election. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  borough  corporation 

to  hold  an  assembly  for  the  purpose  of  electing  guardians  of  the  poor, 
under  the  provisions  of  a  local  act.((:Z)  So  it  has  been  granted  to  com- 
mand churchwardens  to  set  aside  a  certain  election  of  guardians,  and  to 
hold  a  vestry  for  the  purpose  of  electing  four  persons  to  be  such  guardians, 
and  to  proceed  in  their  election. (e) 

.]     Duties,  &c. — '&QQ  titles  Alderman  {Duties) ;   Church  {Church 

Trustees);  Office;  Poor  {Poor  Law    Commissioners). 

.]      Clerk,  Appointment. — It  is  doubtful,   upon   the  authorities, 

whether  the  appointment  of  clerk  to  a  board  of  guardians  of  the  poor,  be 
or  be  not  an  oflBce  for  which  a  mandamus  will  lie ;  whether  it  be  so  or  not, 
depends  entirely  upon  the  nature  of  the  appointment  in  each  particular  case. 
*So  that  when  an  application  as  to  such  an  oflBce  is  made,  the  in- 
[*130]  sj.j.^^jent  instituting  it  should  be  brought  before  the  Court. (/)  If 
the  appointment  should  be  general,  it  will  not  be  construed  quamdiu  se  bene 
gesserit;  it  not  being  a  corporate  office;  for  the  Court  will  look  to  the 
nature  of  the  office,  which,  generally,  it  would  be  inconvenient  to  consider 
as  a  permanent  one.((7) 

.]  Glerh,  Admission. — In  one  case,  the  question  whether  a  man- 
damus would  lie  to  command  an  admission  to  such  office,  and  to  permit 
the  performance  of  the  duties  thereof  ?  was  raised,  but  not  settled ;  the 

(6)  R.  V.  Surrey  (J.),  5  B.  &  A.  539.  S.  C.  1  D.  &  R.  160.f  See  tits.  "  Conviction," 
"Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

(c)  R.  V.  North  Riding  (J.),  3  D.  &  R.  SlO.f  S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  286.f  See  tits. 
" Newgate,"  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices),  "Prisoner."     But  see  tit.   "Present- 

(d)  Ante,  p.  H.  R.  v-  Norwich  (Mayor),  1  B.  <fe  Ad.  ail.f  See  tits.  "Act  of 
Parliament,"  "  Churchwarden,"  "  Corporation  Municipal." 

(e)  R.  V.  Clerkenwell  (Churchwardens),  3  N.  &  M.  411-1  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Elec- 

T/i  R.  V.  Dolgelly  Union,  8  A.  &  E.  SGl.f     S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  542.     See  R.  v.  St. 
Nicolas  (Guardians),  4  M.  &  S.  324.  See  tits.  "  Office"  and  post  "  Application." 
{g)  R.  V.  St.  Nicholas,  supra. 


HALF- PAY,     ETC.  179 

Court  having  refused  the  writ  upon  the  ground,  that  it  cannot  be  granted 
at  the  instance  of  an  applicant  who  complains  that  the  person  filling  the 
office  had  been  unduly  elected ;  because  it  was  effected  by  the  votes  of 
guardians  who  were  themselves  not  properly  elected.  (7t) 

.]     Restoration, — It  has  been,  however,  expressly  decided,  that 

the  writ  lies  not  to  restore  to  the  office  of  clerk  and  treasurer  of  the 
guardians  of  the  poor  of  a  parish,  as  of  the  parish  of  St.  Nicholas,  Roches- 
ter, notwithstanding  he  may  be  denominated  an  officer  by  stat.  49  Geo.  3, 
c.  40,  and  his  place,  an  office ;  for  he  is  only  the  servant  of  a  fugitive 
body,  viz.,  the  parish  officers,  and  his  appointment  is  no  more  permanent 
than  theirs,  (i) 

Guildford,  Approved  Men  of.]  Restoration. — The  writ  lies  to 
restore  to  the  place  of  one  of  the  Approved  Men  of  Guildford. (j) 

Gunmakers'  Company.]  Aj'tprover  of  Guns,  Restoration. — The 
writ  lies  not  to  command  a  restoration  to  the  place  of  approver  of  guns, 
because  the  public  is  in  no  way  concerned,  nor  is  there  any  public  law 
for  it,  but  on  the  contrary,  it  is  of  a  private  nature.  (^) 

As  to  admission,  &c.  to  the  Gunmakers'  Company,  see  titles  Company  ; 
Franchise;  Freedom  (^Company). 

Half-pay. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the  Lords  of  the 
Admiralty  to  pay  deductions  from  an  officer's  half-pay,  nor  even  the  half- 
pay  itself,  nor  the  arrears,  there  being  no  legal  right  to  any  one  of  them, 
each  being,  in  fact,  a  mere  voluntary  donation. (Z). 

*Havering  Court.]     See  tit.  Courts  Inferior.  [*131] 

Hearing.]     See  titles  Courts  Inferior;    Quarter  Sessions  {Hearing). 

Hedges.]     ^QQiii.  HigJiway  (^Fences,  Walls,  Hedges,  &c.) 

High  Constable.]     See  tit.  Constable  {High  Constable). 

(h)  4  B.  &  A.  496.  R.  v.  Dolgelly  Union,  3  N.  &  P.  542.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  561  ;f  2 
H.  &  W.  513.  See  tits.  "Burgess"  (Chief),  "Office"  (Admission). 

(?)  R.  V.  St.  Nicholas  (Guardinns),  4  M.  &  S.  324.  But  see  8  A.  &  E.  561.f  S.  C. 
3  N.  &  P.  542,  supra.     See  tit.  "  Office." 

(j)  Mills'  case,  Raym.  152.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  162,  nom.  R.  v.  Guildford  (Approved 
Men  of).  S.  C.  1  Keb.  868,  880.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  1.  And  see  R.  v.  Exeter  (Dean),  2 
Show.  217,  n.  (a).  See  tit.  "Ashburton"  (Eight  Men  of).  As  to  description,  &c.,  of 
office,  see  tits.  "  Office,"  "Tiverton"  (Twenty-four  Men  of). 

[k]  Vaughan  v.  Gunmakers'  Company,  6  Mod.  82.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  989;  also 
cited  in  R.  v.  Morpeth  (Ball),  Stra.  59.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C,  sed  qu.  See  tit. 
"  Office  "  (Public). 

(Z)  Sec  ante,  p.  27,  28.  Ex  parte  Ricketts,  4  A.  &  E.  999.1  S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  523.f 
Flarty  v.  Odium.  And  see  4  A.  &  E.  995,f  n.  (e).  See  tits.  "Admiralty"  (Lords  of), 
"Pension,"  "Treasury"  (Lords  of). 


180  tapping's    mandamus. 

HiuuwAY.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


Highway. 

Highway. 

Setting  out,  &c.    - 

131 

Appointment 

-     135 

Fences,  walls,  &c. 

i:u 

Swearing  in 

-     135 

Sliitiite  duly          .         -         - 

132 

Accounts 

-     135 

]{ei)airs         _         -         -         - 

132 

Reimbursement 

-     135 

Obstruction           .          .         - 

133 

Books,  Delivery,  &c. 

-     136 

Compensation       .         .         - 

133 

Inspection     - 

-     136 

Diverting,  stopping  up,  &c.   - 

133 

Clerk. 

Toll-gates,  Tolls,  &c.    - 

134 

Admission     - 

-     136 

Rate              .         .         -         - 

134 

Restoration 

-     136 

Surveyors             ... 

135 

Miscellaneous  matter    - 

-     136 

.]  Setting  oiit,  Making,  &c. — The  writ  will  be  granted  to  com- 
mand inclosure  commissioners  under  a  local  and  personal  act,  to  set  out  a 
road  as  a  public  one ;  and  a  power  to  proceed  by  indictment  against  the 
commissioners,  for  not  obeying  an  order  of  sessions  directing  them  to  set 
out  the  road  as  a  public  road,  is  not  such  a  remedy  as  will  determine  the 
Court  not  to  grant  the  writ.(/H)  So  the  writ  lies  to  command  a  railway 
or  other  company  to  make  a  road,  pursuant  to  their  act;(n)  or  to  excavate 
or  widen  a  road,(o)  notwithstanding  the  road  made  be  more  commodious 
than  that  directed  by  such  act.(o) 

.]     Fences,  Walls,  Hedges,  &c. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the 

trustees  for  making  a  turnpike  road  through  private  grounds,  to  make 
proper  fences,  as  required  by  stat.  4  Geo.  4,  c.  95,  s.  66,  and  a  return  of 
the  want  of  necessary  funds  for  that  purpose,  is  no  answer  to  such  a 
writ.(^>)  So  it  lies  to  command  district  road  trustees  to  repair  a  wall  on 
the  road  side,  but  their  liability  must  be  clearly  shewn. (5)  Thus,  although 
r*1  ^91  trustees  under  a  *road  act,  turn  a  road  through  an  inclosure,  and 
'■  "■'  make  the  fences  at  their  own  expense,  and  repair  them  for  several 
years;  yet  the  Court  will  not  compel  them,  by  mandamus,  to  continue 
such  repairs,  unless  there  be  a  special  provision  in  the  act  to  that 
effect,  (r) 

So  the  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  the  reparation  of  hedges,  (s) 
So  it  has  been  granted  to  command  justices  to  issue  their  warrant  in  order 

(m)  Ante,  p.  24.  Anon.,  Lofft.  189.  R.  v.  Dean  Inclosure,  2  M.  &  S.  79.  R.  v. 
Jeyes,  3  A.  k  K.  420.t  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  2  B.  &  C.  229.t  R.  v.  Severn 
Railway  Company,  2  B.  &  A.  649.  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Drainage,"' 
"  Inclosure." 

(n)  Ante,  p.  11.  R.  v.  Birmingham  Railway,  1  G.  &  D.  324.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  41,  j 
where  see  form  of  such  a  mandamus.  S.  C.  2  Rail.  Cas.  694.  R.  v.  Bristol  Rail- 
way, 12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  106,  Q.  B.     See  tits.  "Company,"  "  Railway." 

(o)  R.  V.  Manchester  Railway,  1  G.  &  D.  338,  where  see  form  of  writ. 

( p)  R.  V.  Luton  Roads,  1  G."'  &  D.  248.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  Seo.f  And  see  R.  v.  Eas- 
tern Counties  Railway,  4  P.  &  D.  46.  Sec  tits.  "  Courts  Inferior"  (Holding  Court, 
Return). 

(q)  See  ante,  p.  29.  R.  v.  Llandillo  Roads,  2  T.  R.  232 ;  and  see  12  A.  &  E. 
428.f     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  154.  But  see  infra,  "Repairs,"  and  post,  tit.  "Application." 

Ir)  Ante,  p.  15  ;  2  T.  R.  232,  supra. 

(s)  Anon.,  Comb.  257,  citing  Sty.,  but  Eyre,  J.,  said  he  did  not  see  how  it  lay  for 
hedges. 


HIGHWAY. 


181 


to  levy  the  expenses  of  cutting  a  hedge,  by  the  surveyors  of  highways, 
pursuant  to  stat.  5  &  G  Wm.  4,  c.  50,  s.  65 ;  but  not  unless  it  appear  by 
the  affidavits  in  support  of  the  rule,  that  a  demand  has  been  made  of  the 
expenses,  from  the  persons  sought  to  be  charged,  and  the  justices  were 
informed  of  that  demand. (<) 

.]     Statute  Dutij. — The  writ  lies  to  command  justices  to  receive 

and  determine  an  appeal  by  the  surveyors  of  the  highways,  against  a  con- 
viction for  not  having  delivered  in,  pursuant  to  notice,  to  the  trustees  of 
a  turnpike  road,  under  stat.  17  Geo.  3,  c.  106,  a  list,  in  writing,  of  the 
inhabitants,  &c.  in  the  said  township,  liable  to  do  statute  duty;  but  not 
unless  the  appeal  be  properly  entered. («)  So  it  lies  to  command  justices 
to  compel  the  performance  of  statute  duty  by  those  whose  duty  it  is  to  do 
it;(v)  or  to  command  them  to  enter  continuances,  and  hear  the  appeal  of 
a  road  surveyor  against  an  order  of  justices,  for  the  performance  of  sta- 
tute work,  and  for  the  payment  to  the  treasurer  of  a  turnpike  act,  of  a 
certain  sum  of  money  as  composition  for  statute  duty,(?o)  due  in  respect 
of  the  occupation  of  the  parish  tithes. (x) 

.]  Repairs. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  entertain  an  applica- 
tion for  a  mandamus  to  repair  a  turnpike  road,  and  this  notwithstanding 
the  question  be,  which  of  two  parties  is  liable  to  repair  under  certain  local 
acts  of  Parliament  ?  because  the  best  mode  of  proceeding  is  to  indict  the 
parish,  who  can  then  have  the  fine  apportioned  under  stat.  3  Geo.  4,  c. 
126.  Lord  Denman,  C.  J.,  in  giving  judgment  in  such  case  said,  he 
"knew  no  instance  of  a  mandamus  to  repair  a  road,"  and  in  the  same 
case,  it  was  stated  by  the  Court,  that  "  if  such  applications  were  enter- 
tained, it  would  have  to  try  questions  of  guilty  or  not  guilty  on  the  state 
of  the  roads,  and  all  questions  affecting  the  liability. "(^) 

The  writ  lies  to  command  the  Quarter  Sessions  to  receive  and  proceed 
*upon  a  general  traverse  to  a  presentment  by  a  justice  of  the  r*233-] 
peace,  upon  view  of  a  highway  being  out  of  repair,  (s) 

The  writ  also  lies  to  command  justices  to  issue  their  warrant  for  levy- 
ing costs  against  a  defendant,  against  whom  an  indictment  had  been  pre- 
ferred, for  not  repairing  a  highway,  pursuant  to  stat.  5  &  6  Vict.  c.  5,  ss. 
04,  95,  and  at  the  trial  of  which  the  defendant  was  found  guilty,  and  a 

{t)  Ex  parte  Whitmarsh,  8  D.  431;  4  Jur.  823.  See  post,  tit.  "Application"' 
(Demand  and  Refusal). 

[u)  R.  V.  West  Riding,  3  T.  R.  VTC.  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "ConTic- 
tion,"  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

(v)  R.  V.  Marriott,  1  D.  &  R.  166.f 

iw)  R.  V.  Lancash.  (J.),  2  M.  &  R.  519.     S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  593.t 

(z)  R.  V.  Buckinghamsli.  (J.),  2  D.  &  R.  689.t  R.  v.  Lacy,  5  B.  &  C.  "706. f  See 
tit.  "  Tithes." 

\y)  Ante,' p.  25.  R.  v.  Oxford  Roads,  4  P.  &  D.  154.  S.  C.  12  A.  &  E.  427  ;t  6 
Jur.  216,  n.  R.  v.  Bristol  Dock,  1  G.  &  D.  28G.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  64.t  But  see  R.  v. 
Llandillo  Roads,  2  T.  R.  232,  and  supra;  "  Fences,"  &c.  R.  v.  Wilts.  (J.),  8  D. 
71*7,  infra. 

(z)  R.  v.  Wilts  (J.),  Burr.  1530,  1532.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  40*7.  Matthew  v.  Carey, 
Carth.  74;  1  Hawk.  P.  0.  217.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)  See  tit.  "Present- 
ment." 


182  tapping's    mandamus. 

valid  order  for  the  payment  of  the  costs  of  the  indictment  had  been  made 
by  the  sessions. (a) 

.]      Obstruction. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  justice  to  hear  and 

determine  an  information  exhibited  before  him,  by  the  surveyor  of  the 
pavements,  under  the  provisions  of  a  paving  act,  against  a  hackneyman, 
for  taking  his  stand  with  his  chariot,  and  plying  for  his  fare  there,  and 
thereby  obstructing  a  public  thoroughfare.(i)  It  lies  also  to  command 
justices  to  hear  an  appeal  as  to  laying  soil,  &c.  on  a  highway.(f;) 

.]      Compensation. — As  to  obtaining  compensation  for  land  taken 

for  the  purpose  of  a  highway.     See  tit.  Comjwnsation. 

.]  Diverting,  Stojyjnng  iip,  &c. — The  writ  lies  to  command  jus- 
tices at  Quarter  Sessions  to  enter  an  application  made  for  enrolling  an 
order  made  by  two  justices  of  the  county,  for  diverting  and  turning  a 
public  footway,  and  to  enter  continuances  thereon  to  the  next  general 
Quarter  Sessions  of  the  peace  to  be  holden  in  and  for  the  said  county, 
and  at  such  sessions  to  hear  and  determine  such  application. (r?)  So  it 
lies  to  command  the  Quarter  Sessions  to  confirm  a  valid  order  of  justices, 
for  diverting  and  turning  a  footpath  or  highway,  pursuant  to  stat.  55  Geo. 
3,  c.  68. (e)  So  it  lies  to  command  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  to  enter 
continuances  and  hear  an  appeal  against  an  order  of  justices  for  diverting 
certain  public  footways.(/)  So  it  lies  to  command  the  Court  of  Quarter 
Sessions  to  enter  continuances  and  hear  an  appeal  against  the  confirmation 
of  an  order  made  under  stat.  55  Geo.  3,  c.  68,  s.  2,  for  stopping  up  as  use- 
less and  unnecessary  part  of  a  public  highway,(i7)  or  for  diverting  it.(^)  So 
it  lies  to  command  the  Quarter  Sessions  to  enter  continuances  and  hear  an 

.  ,-.  appeal  against  the  *inclosure  of  a  highway,  upon  a  writ  of  ad 
'-  quod  damnum. (i)     So  for  stopping  up  a  private  road  under  an 

inclosure  act.(y)  In  all  these  cases  the  applicant  must  be  fully  entitled 
to  the  writ.(7(;) 

.]  Toll-gate;  Tolls. — The  Court  will  refuse  a  mandamus  to  com- 
mand the  Quarter  Sessions  to  hear  an  original  complaint  touching  the 

(a)  R.  V.  Martin,  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  45,  M.  C.  R.  v.  Clark,  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  91,  M.  C. 
See  tits.  "  Costs."  "Quarter  Sessions,"  (Justices.) 

(6)  Ante,  p.  11.  R.  v.  Rawlinson,  6  B.  &  C.  23.f  S.  C.  9  D.  &  R.  Y.f  And  see 
Frost  V.  Williams,  7  A.  &  E.  779,  782.f     See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions."  (Justices). 

(c)  R.  V.  North  Riding  (J.),  7  Q.  B.  154.t     S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  91,  M.  C. 

(d)  R.  V.  Gloucester  (J.),  6  N.  &  M.  115. f     See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions." 

(e)  R.  T.  Worcestersh.  (J.),  2  B.  &  A.  228.  R.  v.  Surry  (J.),  5  B.  &  C.  241.t 
R.  V.  Suffolk  (J.),  6B.  &  C.  lll.f 

(/)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  4  B.  &  Ad.  G85.f  S.  C.  1  X.  &  M.  426.f  R.  v.  Sur- 
rey (J.),  7  D.  &  R.  857-1 

(g)  R.  V.  Essex  (J.),  7   D.  &  R.  658.f     R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  7  B.  &  C.  678.t 

S.  C.  1   M.  &  R.  547.     R.  V. (J.),  1   Chit.   164.      R.  v.  Pembrokesh.  (J.),  2 

East,  212.     And  see  M.  &  S.  231. 

{h)  R.  V.  Staffordsh.  (J.),  3  East,  150.  R.  v.  Townsend,  5  B.  &  A.  421.  R.  v. 
Staffordsh.  (J.),  7  T.  R.  81. 

(i)  R.  V.  Essex  (J.),  1  B.  &  A.  373.  R.  v.  Bucks  (J.),  2  M.  &  S.  230.  And  see 
post,  tit.  "  Application," 

(/)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  D.  &  R.  SOC.f     See  tit.  "  Inclosure." 

\k)  Ante,  pp.  27,  28.     See  post,  tit.  "Application." 


HIGHWAY. 


183 


conduct  of  the  trustees  of  a  turnpike  road,  in  the  erection  of  a  toll-gate, 
after  a  lapse  of  twenty  years  from  its  erection,  on  the  ground  that  the  appli- 
cation is  too  late ;  so  that  the  applicant  will  be  left  to  proceed  by  indictment 
for  the  nuisance  ;  or  by  an  action  of  trespass,  if  his  passage  be  obstructed.  (0 

It  lies,  however,  to  command  the  trustees  of  a  turnpike  road,  to  call  a 
meeting  under  stat.  59  Geo.  3,  for  the  purpose  of  establishing  an  uni- 
form rate  of  tolls,  to  be  taken  at  all  the  different  toll-bars  and  toll-houses  on 
the  line  of  road,  and  to  do  all  necessary  acts  for  the  calling  of  such  meeting.(m) 

It  lies  also  to  command  the  hearing  of  an  appeal  on  a  conviction  for 
non-payment  of  tolls. (n) 

.]     Rate. — The  writ  lies  to  command  justices  to  make  a  highway 

rate,  pursuant  to  an  act  of  Parliament. (o)  It  lies  also  to  command  jus- 
tices to  receive  an  appeal,(p)  made  against  a  distress,  or  to  levy  a  dis- 
tress,(^)  for  nonpayment  of  a  sum  of  money  due  for  a  highway  rate. 
Formerly,  however,  if  the  legality  of  the  rate  were  not  clear,(r)  or  merely 
doubtful ;  or  if  for  any  other  cause,  the  issuing  of  such  a  warrant  might  have 
subjected  the  justices  to  an  action,  the  result  of  which  might  be  doubtful, 
especially  if  no  indemnity  had  been  offered  to  the  justices,  the  Court 
always  refused  the  writ.  Thus,  the  Court  has  refused,  by  mandamus,  to 
command  a  magistrate  to  issue  a  distress  warrant  for  a  parish  highway 
rate,  under  stat.  18  Geo.  3,  c.  78,  ss.  45,  67,  made  upon  the  occupier  of 
lands  within  his  district,  as  it  appeared  that  in  the  magistrate's  belief 
and  in  fact  there  was,  a  reasonable  doubt  as  to  the  liability  of  such  occu- 
pier to  contribute  to  the  repairs  of  the  parish  highways,  and  that  the 
magistrate  was  likely  to  be  sued  if  the  warrant  were  granted  and  acted 
upon,  and  this  although  the  occupier  had  not  appealed  against  the 
rate.(s)  But  see  the  late  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  *c.  67,  s.  3,(0  which,  r*235] 
as  it  provides  a  full  indemnity  for  all  acts  properly  done  in  exe- 
cution of  a  writ  of  mandamus,  it  is  apprehended  the  Court  will  not  now 
BO  closely  scrutinize  the  legality  of  the  rate,  &c. 

.]     Surveyors,  AjJjJointment. — The  writ  lies  to  command  justices 

to  appoint  road  surveyors, (m)  or  to  convene  a  vestry,  and  proceed  to  an 

(Z)  R.  T.  Cambridgesh.  (J.),  1  D.  &  R.  325.f  See  also  R.  v.  Lancash.  (J.),  12 
East,  366.     See  also  tit.  "  Canal  Company,"  and  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

(m)  R.  V.  Bury  Roads,  6  D.  &  R.  SeS.f     See  tit.  "  Tolls." 

(n)  R.  V.  Middlesex  (J.),  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  59,  M.  C.  See  tits.  "Conviction," 
"  Quarter  Sessions,"  (Appeal). 

(o)  R.  V.  Lancash.  (J.),  12  East,  368.  R.  v.  The  Padding  Vestry,  9  B.  &  C.  461.t 
See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "Borough"  (Rate),  "Church"  (Rate),  "County" 
(Rate),  "  Poor"  (Rate). 

{p)  R.  V.  Devon  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  410.  R.  v.  Lancash.  (J.),  8  B.  &  C.  596.f  See 
tits.  "  Drainage"  (Rate),  "  Parish."  (Rate). 

Iq)  R.  V.  Best,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  102,  M.  C. 

(r)  R.  V.  Mirehouse,  &c.,  2  A.  &  E.  632.t  R.  v.  Greame,  2  A.  &  E.  614.f  See 
K.  V.  Cumberland  (J.),  4  A.  &  E.  697.1 

(s)  R.  T.  Greame,  2  A.  &  E.  615 ;  2  A.  &  E.  632,f  supra.  R.  v.  Morgan,  2  A.  & 
E.  618,t  n.  (a).  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  68,f  nom.  R.  v.  Buckinghamsh.  (J.) ;  and  see  1 
B.  &  C.  485.1     R.  V.  Somersetsh.  (J.),  1  H.  &  W.  82. 

(t)  App.,  and  see  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices). 

(«)  R.  V.  Dr.  Pettiward,  &c.  Burr.  2453.     R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.),  1  D.   116.     Bac. 


184  TAPriNO's     MANDAMUS. 

election, (i')  cither  for  tbe  whole  of  the  year  or  for  part,  where  the  ap- 
poiutmcut  in  due  time  has  been  neglected  ;(w)  and  it  also  lies  to  com- 
mand parish  officers  to  produce  the  rates,  and  rate  and  other  books  at  the 
scrutiny  of  a  poll,  which  has  been  taken  at  the  election  of  surveyors  of 
highways.  (.<•) 

.]     Surveyors,   Swearimj  in. — The  writ   also  lies  to    command 

justices  to  swear  in  surveyors  of  the  highways. (3/) 

.]     Surveyors,  Accounts. — The  Court  will,  when  a  surveyor  of  the 

highways  has  improperly  allowed  the  time  for  producing  and  passing  his 
accounts  to  elapse,  command  him,  by  writ  of  mandamus,  to  produce 
them. (2)  But  such  writ  will  not  be  granted  to  command  the  Quarter 
Sessions  to  enter  continuances  and  hear  an  appeal  against  the  allowance 
of  the  accounts  of  a  surveyor  of  the  highways,  because  no  appeal  lies  to 
such  sessions  under  stat.  5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  50,  s.  44,  nor  can  the  Court 
grant  a  writ  to  the  Special  Sessions  to  review  their  decision,  by  requiring 
them  to  re-examine  such  accounts,  after  they  have  once  adjudicated  and 
passed  the  accounts ;  although  it  appear  that  improper  items  have  been 
passed,  and  notwithstanding  the  justices  who  passed  them  admit  and  de- 
pose that  they  did  not  fully  investigate  the  case,  believing  that  an  appeal 
lay 'from  them  to  the  Quarter  Sessions;  the  Court,  in  giving  judgment 
saying,  that  to  unravel  the  grounds  and  motives  which  may  have  led  to 
the  determination  of  a  question  once  settled  by  the  jurisdiction  to  which, 
the  law  has  referred  it,  would  be  extremely  dangerous,  and  many  authori- 
ties prove  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  not  the  power,  and  there  are  none  to 
the  opposite  effect. (a) 

.]      Surveyor,   Reimbursement. — The  writ  has    been   granted   to 

command  the  making  of  a  rate  to  reimburse  a  survey  of  the  highways, 
r*i  Qfti  *^  ^"■'^  ^^  money  he  had  expended  in  the  execution  of  his  office, 
^         -^  under  stat.  3  &  4  Wm.  &  M.  c.  12.(&) 

.]  Books,  &c.,  Delivery  of. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  sur- 
veyor of  highways  to  deliver  to  the  churchwardens  of  a  parish,  under 

Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)  See  tits.  "Churchwarden"  (Appointment),  "Ofllce"  (Ap- 
pointment). 

[y)  Ex  parte  Grossmith,  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  359,  Q.  B.  See  tits.  "'  Corporation  Muni- 
cipal," "  Parish." 

(m))  R.  V.  Denbighsh.  (J.),  4  East,  142.  R.  v.  Sparrow,  Stra.  1123;  1  Const's 
Bott.  17th  edit.,  1793.  R.  v.  Baldwin,  7  T.  R.  169.  R.  t.  King's  Newton  (Inhabs.), 
1  B.  &  Ad.  830.f     See  tit.  "Churchwardens." 

[%)  R.  V.  Fall,  1  G.  &  D.  118.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  636.t  See  infra  as  to  books,  and  tit. 
"Books,"  "County"  "Treasurer). 

(r/)  R.  V.  Pettiward,  Burr.  2452.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  See  tit.  "  Office" 
(Swearing  in). 

{z)  R.  V.  Lewis,  1  D.  530.  R.  v.  Denbighsh.  (J.),  4  East,  142.  R.  v.  Sparrow, 
Stra.  1123.  R.  v.  Norwich  (Mayor),  1  B.  &  Ad.  3 1 0.f  See  tits.  "  Accounts,"  "  Church- 
wardens "  (Accounts). 

[a)  Ante,  p.  10,  11.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  1  G.  &  D.  198.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  624.f 
S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  137,  M.  C.  See  tits.  "Courts  Inferior"  (Rehearing),  "Quarter 
Sessions"  (Rehearing). 

(6)  Hasell's  case,  Str.  211.  R.  v.  Wallingford,  Kel.  209;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man." 
(A.)  See  tits. "  Churchwarden  "  (Reimbursement),  "Drainage"  (Reimbursement). 


HIGHWAY.  185 

stat.  13  Geo.  3,  c.  78,  s.  48,  all  books  of  account  iu  Lis  custody,  power, 
or  possession,  relating  to  tlie  highways  within  the  parish.  And  to  such 
a  writ,  a  return  "  that  on  and  since  the  test  of  the  writ,  the  defendant 
had  not,  nor  has  had  the  books,  &c.,  nor  any  of  them,  &c.,"  is  good; 
altliough  it  unnecessarily  allege  that  the  defendant  had  them  not  on  a 
prior  day,  when  it  is  surmised  in  the  writ  that  they  were  demanded. 
The  defendant  is  not  bound  to  negative  a  possession  intermediate  between 
the  demand  and  the  test ;  and  whether,  under  the  circumstances,  the 
books,  &c.  were  in  the  power  of  A.  is  a  question  to  be  raised  by  a  traverse 
to  the  return,  or  by  an  action  for  a  false  return. (c) 

.]     Boohs,  Inspection,  &c. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  road 

trustees  to  grant  inspection  of  books,  &c. ;  but  the  right  to  such  inspection 
must  be  clear,  either  by  act  of  Parliament  or  otherwise,  and  must  appear 
upon  the  affidavits. (cZ) 

.]      Clerk,  Admission. — The  writ  lies  to  admit  to   the  office  of 

clerk  to  turnpike  trustees  under  the  general  turnpike  acts ;  but  not  if  the 
office  be  full,  as  in  such  case  the  public  suffer  no  inconvenience. (e) 

.]      Clerk,  Restoration. — So  a  mandamus  to  restore  to  such  office 

will  be  granted  on  an  illegal  removal. (/) 

.]     Miscellaneo^is  31atters. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  surveyor 

of  the  highways  to  pay  the  arrears  of  rent  for  land  taken  up  in  the  for- 
mation of  a  road.(<7)  So  it  lies  to  command  justices  to  convict  a  surveyor 
of  highways  in  5?.,  and  to  make  an  order  upon  him  to  limit  and  appoint  a 
time  for  the  repair  of  a  road ;  but  not  if  the  magistrates  have  exercised 
their  discretion  not  to  convict. (/t)  So  it  lies  to  command  justices  to  hear 
the  appeal  of  a  surveyor  under  stat.  4  &  5  Vict.  c.  59. (i)  The  writ  also 
lies  to  command  the  Quarter  Sessions  to  enter  continuances  and  hear  an 
appeal  against  a  conviction  of  one  justice,  under  the  Turnpike  Act,  4 
Geo.  4,  *c.  95.  (y)  So  to  hear  an  appeal  against  an  order  made  ^r-io>j-i 
by  commissioners  under  a  local  turnpike  act;(7t)  but  where,  by 

(c)  R.  V.  Round,  5  N.  &  M.  A2l.\  S.  C.  4  A.  &E.  139,f  where  see  a  form  of  writ 
and  return,  1  Htir.  &  W.  546.  R.  v.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  404  ;t  1  W.  W.  &  IL  99  ;  2  Jur. 
4Y.  R.  V.Hopkins,  4  P.  &  D.  550.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  IGl.f  See  tits.  "Books,  &c.," 
"  Company,"  "Corporation"  (Municipal),  "County,"  "Drainage,"  and  see  post  tit. 
"Return." 

id)  Ante,  p.  16.     R.  v.  Northleach  Roads,  5  B.  &  Ad.  978.f  See  note  (o). 

\e)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Chesliunt  Roads,  5  B.  &  Ad.  438,  439,f  note,  [a)  See  also 
R.  V.  Dolgelly  Union,  8  A.  &  E.  562.f  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Admission). 

(/)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.v.  Wrexham  Roads,  5  A.  &E.  581.f  See  tit.  "Office"  (Resto- 
ration.) 

{fj)  R.  V.  Baldwin,  3  P.  &  D.  124.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  947.1  See  tit.  "Compensation" 
(Payment). 

(/()  Ante,  pp.  12,  13.  R.T.  Wilts.  (J.),  8  D.  717  ;  and  see  supra,  and  tit.  "'  Convic- 
tion." 

(i)  R.  V.  Derbyshire  (J.),  7  Q.  B.  193.f  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  84,  Q.  B.  See  tits. 
"Act  of  Parliament,"  "Court  Inferior"  (Hearing),  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

{j)  R.  V.  Middlesex  (J.)  2  D.,  N.  S.  719.  R.  v.  Bedfordsh.  (J.),  3  P.  &  D.  21.  See 
tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

(/f)  R.  V.  Worcestersh.  (J.),  9  D.  &  R.  211.f   Sec  tit.  "Act  of  Parliament." 


186  tapping's    mandamus. 

such  local  act,  an  appeal  when  heard  is  final,  in  such  case  a  mandamus 
will  not  be  granted  to  command  a  rehearing  of  it.(^.) 

Hospital.]  Sister,  Restoration. — The  writ  lies  not  to  restore  to  the 
place  of  sister  in  an  hospital,  she  being  but  an  almswoman  at  will,  and 
under  the  jurisdiction  of  a  visitor. (m) 

.]  Surgeon,  Swearing  in. — The  writ  lies  not  to  swear  in  a  sur- 
geon of  an  hospital,  because  he  is  a  mere  private  servant,  and  not  a  public 
officer.  (?i) 

.]     Restoration. — And  for  the  same  reason,  the  writ  does  not  lie 

to  restore  to  such  a  place. (o) 

.]     Seal. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  master  of  an  hospital  to 

affix  its  common  seal  to  a  deed  of  presentation,  presenting  to  a  vicarage 
with  the  gift  of  such  hospital. (^) 

Hospitaller.]  Restoration. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  restore  an 
hospitaller,(2')  he  not  being  an  officer  of  public  concern. 

HosTMEN  OP  New  Castle.]     See  tit.  New  Castle  Hostmen. 

Inclosure.]  Appeal. — The  writ  lies  to  command  justices  of  the  peace 
at  Quarter  Sessions  to  cause  continuances  to  be  entered  upon  an  appeal 
against  an  order  or  adjudication  made  by  a  commissioner  under  a  local 
inclosure  act,  where  such  power  of  appeal  is  given,  and  the  appeal  ought 
to  be  heard.  (?•) 

As  to  inclosure  of  highway,  or  making,  &c.,  a  highway  under  inclosure 
acts,  see  tit.  IIighivay.(s) 

The  writ  has  also  been  granted  to  command  the  surveyor  and  commis- 
sioner, under  an  inclosure  act,  to  ascertain  if  there  be  any  modus  as  to  the 
*lands,  the  subject  of  the  inclosure.(<)  Also  to  command  a  com- 
L         J  missioner,  under  an  inclosure  act,  to  effect  an  exchange  if  he  have 

(I)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  N.  &  M.  86.f  S.  C.  1  A.  &  E.  606.  See  tits  "  Cer- 
tiorari," "  Courts  Inferior"  (Rehearing),  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (.Rehearing). 

(m)  R.  V.  Wheler,  3  Keb.  360;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.  2.  See  tit.  "  Office" 
(Freehold). 

(n\  Anon.  7  Mod.  118  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C. ;  and  see  tit.  "  Office." 

\o)  Anon.  Comb.  41. 

\p)  R.  V.  Kendall,  4  P.  &  D.  603.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  366  ;f  -when  the  writ  is  merely  to 
affix  the  seal,  it  may  properly  be  directed  to  the  Master  alone.  See  tit.  "  College" 
(Seal),  "Corporation  Municipal"  (Seal),  "Seal." 

{q)  R.  V.  London  Water  Works,  1  Lev.  23,  per  Wyndham,  J.  See  tit.  "  Office" 
(Public). 

(r)  R.  V.  Lancashire(J.),  1  B.  &  A.  630.1  R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.),  1  Chit.  366.t  R. 
V.  Wilts.  (.L),  13  East,  351.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  2  B.  &  C.  228.f  R.  v.  Glou- 
cestershire (J.),  3  M.  &  S.  127.  See  tit.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "Drainage,"  "  Quarter 
Sessions"  (Appeal). 

(s)  1  B.  &  Ad.  378, f  infra.     And  see  tit.     "  Act  of  Parliament." 

{t)  Anon.,  2  Chit.  251. f  In  such  case  the  rule  nisi  was  ordered  to  be  served  on 
the  vicar  or  his  impropriator.     See  tit.  "  Tithe." 


INNOFCOURT.  187 

power  to,  and  should  do  so.(w)  And  also  to  command  Inclosurc  Commis- 
sioners to  set  out  and  appoint  an  occupation  road  to  two  several  allotments 
by  them  set  out,  and  to  make  and  publish  their  award  as  directed  by  the 
local  act.(D) 

Inhibition.]  As  to  such  a  return,  see  tit.  Churchwarden  (Return) ; 
Registrar  (Return^. 

Inn  Burgess  op  Wigan.]     See  tit.  Burgess  (Inn,  &c.),  pp.  54,  57. 

Inn  op  Chancery.]  In  analogy  with  the  law  of  mandamus  as  to  Inns 
of  Court,  so  such  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  one  elected  principal  of  an 
Inn  of  Chancery  to  attend  before  the  benchers  of  the  Inn  of  Court  to 
which  such  Inn  of  Chancery  is  attached,  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  such 
benchers  to  decide  upon  the  validity  of  his  election ;  unless  it  be  clearly 
shewn  that  the  benchers  of  such  Inn  of  Court  have,  on  some  former  occa- 
sion, exercised  such  jurisdiction  in  invitum.(to) 

As  to  the  granting  of  the  writ  to  command  admission,  &c.,  see  titles 
Attorney  ;  Barnard's  Inn;  College  {Member)  ;  Franchise  {Freedom)  ;  Inn 
of  Court  (Admission). 

Inn  op  Court.]  It  is  clearly  settled,  that  the  writ  of  mandamus  can- 
not be  issued  against  the  Inns  of  Court  as  to  any  matter  connected  with 
their  internal  regulations,  &c. ;  because  they  are  private  and  voluntary 
societies  submitting  to  government,  and  also,  that  the  ancient  and  usual 
way  of  redress  for  any  wrong  done  by  them  as  to  admission,  &c.  of  mem- 
bers, is  by  appeal  to  the  Judges  of  the  superior  Courts  of  Common  Law,(a;) 
who  have  a  domestic  jurisdiction  over  the  Inns. 

.]     Admission  as  Member. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  grant  a 

mandamus  to  command  the  benchers  of  an  Inn  of  Court  to  admit  an  in- 
dividual to  become  one  of  its  members,  in  order  that  he  may  qualify  him- 
self to  be  called  to  the  Bar ;  because  such  a  society  being  purely  volun- 
tary, has  a  discretion  as  to  the  admission  or  rejection  of  applicants. (3/) 

iu)  R.  V.  Flockwold  Inclosure,  2  Chit.  251.+     See  tit.  "  Commissioners." 

\v)  R.  V.  Cockermouth  Inclosure  Act,  1  B.  &  Ad.  378.f  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parlia- 
ment." "  Award,"  "  Highways." 

{w)  Ante,  p.  10.  R.  v.  Allen,  &c.,  3  N.  &  M.  184.t  S.  C.  5  B.  &  Ad.  984.t  See 
tit.  "Inn  of  Court." 

(x)  See  ante,  p.  21,  and  infra,  "Admission  to  Degree,  &c."  Per  Hale,  C.  J.,  in 
Appleford's  case,  1  Mod.  84,  citing  R.  v.  Gray's  Inn,  Dougl.  353.  See  Townsend'3 
case,  Raym.  G9,  and  R.  Physicians'  (Coll.),  2  Show.  178,  179,  n.  (b),  3rd  edit.,  per 
Pemberton,  C.  J.  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.  2.  See  tits.  "  Inu  of  Chancery," 
"  Visitor." 

(y)  Ante,  pp.  12,  13.  R.  v.  Lincoln's  Inn,  4  B.  &  C.  855.t  S.  C.  7  D.  &  R.  351.f 
R.  V.  Barnard's  Inn,  5  A.  &  E.  23.f  R.  v.  Gray's  Inn,  Doug.  359.  Protector  v.  Cray- 
ford,  Sty.  457.  Dr.  Widdrington's  case,  Raym.  69;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.)  ; 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.  2.  See  tits.  "Advocate  of  Doctors'  Commons,"  "  College" 
(Admission),  "Distribution,"  "University"  (Admission). 


188  tapping's    mandamus. 

r*lQQl      * •]     Admission  to  Degree,  &c. — So  the  writ  docs   not  lie 

'-  to  command  the  benchers  of  an  Inn  of  Court  to  admit  to  the 

degree  of  burristcr-at-law  ;  for  the  only  mode  of  relief  is  by  appeal  to  the 
Judges  of  the  superior  Courts  of  Common  Law,  who  have  a  domestic 
jurisdiction  over  the  Inns.(2) 

.]     Restoration  to  Degree. — So  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  constantly 

held,  that  a  mandamus  does  not  lie  to  command  restoration  to  the  degree 
of  barrister-at-law,  of  which  the  prosecutor  has  been  improperly  deprived; 
the  proper  proceeding  in  such  a  case  being,  as  before  stated^  by  appeal  to 
the  Judges. (a) 

Inquest.]  The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the  jury  of  an  inquest 
to  find  a  particular  fact.(/:>) 

Insanity.]     See  titles  Lunatic ;  Poor. 

Insignia.]  See  titles  Corporation  Municipal  (^Insignia,  &c.)  ;  Insig- 
nia, &c.  ;  Mai/or  ;   Seal. 

Insolvent.]  The  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  justices  to  direct 
the  clerk  of  the  peace  to  assign  over  the  effects  of  a  debtor,  to  a  creditor, 
in  pursuance  of  stat.  2  Geo.  2,  c.  22,  but  not  to  a  particular  creditor  by 
name,  because  the  justices  are  not  so  authorized  by  the  statute. (c) 

So  the  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  justices  to  give  judgment  in 
a  case,  upon  the  statute  for  releasing  poor  prisoners. (cZ) 

So  the  writ  lies  to  command  the  commissioners  of  the  Court,  for  the 
relief  of  insolvent  debtors,  to  receive  and  hear  the  petition  of  a  person 
desiring  and  entitled  to  obtain  the  benefit  of  the  act  (1  Geo.  4,  c.  119), 
and  to  proceed  to  an  adjudication  thereupon. (e) 

.]     Discharge. — The  writ  has  also  been  granted  to  command  jus- 

r*1  dm  ^^^^^  ^'^  discharge  a  prisoner,  in  pursuance  of  an  act  of  Parliament, 
for  the  *relief  of  poor  prisoners,(/)  and  it  has  also  been  granted 

(z)  Ante,  p.  21.  R.  r.  Gray's  Inn  (Benchers),  1  Doug.  353.  Boorman's  case, 
March.  177,  which  was  a  writ  of  restitution.  Rakestraw  &  Brewer,  2  P.  Wms. 
511.  Townsend's  case,  Raym.  69.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  458.  R.  v.  Lincoln's  Inn,  4  B.  & 
C.  856-1  R.  V.  Coll.  of  Physic,  2  Show.  179,  n.  (b),  3rd  edit.  See  tits.  "Advocate 
of  Doctors'  Commons,"  "University"  (Degree),  "Visitor." 

(a)  Ante,  p.  21.  Boorman's  case,  March.  177.  R.  v.  Gray's  Inn,  Doug.  359.  See 
Townsend's  case,  1  Keb.  458.  S.  C.  Raym.  69.  Estwick's  case,  Sty.  42.  Dr. 
Withrington's  case,  1  Keb.  122.  See  tits.  "College,"  "  Physicians'  College,"  "Uni- 
versity," "  Visitor." 

(b)  Comb.  239  ;  1  W.  Blac.  64.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.  See  tits.  "  Coroner,"  "  Court 
Inferior"  (Rehearing),  "  Freeman,"  "  Jury." 

(c)  R.  V.  Surrey  (J.),  2  Barn.  410,  and  cases  there  cited.  See  tits.  "Act  of  Par- 
liament," "Bankrupt,"  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices). 

(d)  Treraignon's  case,  Comb.  203.  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "Quarter 
Sessions"  (Justices),  "  Bankrupt." 

(e)  Ex  parte  Deacon,  5  B.  &  A.  759.  See  tit.  "Pension."  See  tit.  "  Act  of  Par- 
liament." 

(/)  R.  V.  Surrey  (J.),  2  Show.  74,  T.  31,  Car.  2,  B.  R.;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 
(D.)     See  tit.  "  Act  of  Parliament." 


JUDGMENT.  189 

to  command  the  Marshal  of  the  Quceu's  Bench  Prison,  to  include  in  his 
list  of  debtors  the  name  of  the  applicant,  he  being  duly  entitled,  in  order 
that  he  might  take  the  benefit  of  the  insolvent  act,  34  George  3,  c.  QQ;{g) 
so,  it  has  been  granted  for  the  same  purpose,  under  stat.  44  Geo.  3,  c. 
108,  s.  1  ;(/0  also  to  command  the  making  of  an  order,  to  cause  a  pri- 
soner in  execution  to  be  brought  up  under  stat.  2  Geo.  2,  c.  22,  in  order 
that  he  might  take  the  benefit  of  the  Insolvent  Debtors'  Acts.(t)  So  it 
has  been  granted  to  command  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions,  to  inquire 
and  give  the  benefit  of  the  Insolvent  Debtors'  Act  to  a  prisoner  if  duly 
entitled  to  it.(,/)  So  where  an  insolvent  debtor  brought  up  to  the  Quar- 
ter Sessions,  under  the  repealed  insolvent  act  of  34  Geo.  3,  c.  69,  was 
remanded  upon  a  charge,  which  he  gave  notice  he  would  disprove  at  a 
subsequent  adjournment  of  the  sessions;  the  Court  of  B.  R.  granted  him 
a  mandamus,  commanding  that  he  should  be  brought  up  for  such  pur- 
pose. (A-) 

Insuitutions,  Private.]  The  Court  of  B.  R.  constantly  interferes 
by  mandamus,  with  respect  to  private  foundations,  as  in  the  cases  of 
charities,  dissenting  ministers,  lecturers,  visitors,  &c.,(^  but  the  appli- 
cants must  be  legally  entitled  to  that  for  which  they  ask.(m) 

Inspection  of  Books,  Rolls,  &c.] — See  titles  Accounts;  Boohs; 
Company;    Corporation  Municipal;   Manor  Rolls ;  Rate. 

Joiners'  Company.]  See  titles  Company;  Franchise;  Freedom 
(  Company^  ;  Freeman. 

Joint  Stock  Company.]     See  tit.  Company  (Joint  Stock). 

Judgment.]  Enforcing. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  enforce  a  judgment 
obtained  in  an  action  in  one  of  the  superior  Courts,  because  there  is  a 
specific  legal  remedy  most  eflicacious  in  its  nature,  namely,  a  writ  of  exe- 
cution in  the  ordinary  form.  Thus,  where  the  prosecutor  had  obtained  a 
judgment,  and  entered  it  up  against  a  corporation,  which  afterwards  ap- 
peared to  have  no  assets ;  the  Court  refused  to  issue  the  writ  to  command 
them  to  pay  the  amount  of  such  judgment,  merely  on  the  ground  that  an 

[q)  R.  T.  Jones,  6  T.  R.  28.     R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  6  T.  R.  VT. 

(h)  Ex  parte  Chiffench,  6  East,  346  and  347,  n.  {a). 

(?)  R.  T.  Ipswich  (Bailiffs),  7  East,  84.  Ex  parte  King,  7  East,  91,  and  cited  m 
15  East,  120;  and  see  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions." 

(y)  Ante,  p.  11.    Ex  parte  King,  7  East,  90,  and  cited  in  15  East,  126  ;  44  Geo. 
3,  c.  108.     See  tits.  "  Courts  Inferior." 
'  (/c)  R.  V.  Surrey  (J.),  6  T.  R.  7G ;  and  see  3  D.  &  R.  SlO.f     See  tit.  "  Biinkrupt. 

(?)  Which  tits.  see.  ^    „     ,^.    , 

\m)  Ante,  p.  28.  R.  v.  Ottery  St.  Mary,  3  G.  &  D.  383.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  157,t 
■svhere  see  per  Ld.  Denman,  C.  J.  The  cases  of  mandamus  to  admit  di.-^senting 
ministers  are  clearly  cases  of  private  trust.  See  tits.  "  Charity,"  "  Church,"  "  Dis- 
senters," "Office"  (Public,  Election). 


190  tapping's    mandamus. 

r*1in  execution  might  =Hurn  out  fruitless. (?i)  But  if  the  judgment  be 
not  so  entered  up  against  the  company,  then  it  seems  the  Court 
will  "•rant  the  writ  of  mandamus,  (o) 

As  to  judgment  in  compensation  cases,  see  tit.  Compensation  (^Com- 
panij). 

As  to  judgment  and  execution  of  Inferior  Courts,  see  tits.  Courts  In- 
ferior (Jiuhjvient,  Execution,  &c.)  ;   Costs. 

Jurats.]  The  writ  of  mandamus  has  often  been  granted  in  respect  of 
the  ofl&ce  of  jurat  of  a  municipal  corporation,  because  it  is  a  public  office 
and  a  freehold. (2:*) 

.]     Election. — See  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App.,  the  provisions  of 

which  should  be  followed. 

.]  Adinission  and  Swearing  in. — So  the  writ  has  been  granted  to 

admit  and  swear  in  to  the  office  of  jurat. (5) 

.]     Restoration. — So  the  writ  lies  to  restore  to  such  an  office  after 

unlawful  deprivation. (/•) 

And  it  lies  to  return  a,  jurat,  as  mayor  elect,  if  duly  entitled. (s) 

Jury.]  The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  a  jury  to  find  a  particular 
verdict,  or  to  present  a  particular  fact.(^) 

As  to  summoning  a  jury.     See  tit.  Manor  {Leet  Jury'). 

Justice's  Clerk].  Restoration. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  restore  a 
justice's  clerk  to  his  office,  although  he  may  have  been  dismissed  without 
cause,  and  although  it  be  such  an  office  as  entitles  to  compensation  under 
stat.  5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  76,  and  is  recognised  by  several  public  acts  of  Par- 
liament; for  such  clerk  has  no  permanent  interest  in  his  office,  being  in  at 
the  mere  pleasure  of  the  justices,  in  this  respect  he  resembles  a  mere  ves- 
try clerk  :(?/)  and  as  the  office  of  clerk  to  a  stipendiary  magistracy  is  not 
within  the  stat.  5  &  6  Vict.  c.  Ill,  so  a  mandamus  under  such  statute  for 
compensation  for  loss  of  such  office  does  not  lie.(t') 

{n)  Ante,  p.  23.  R.  v.  Victoria  Park,  4  P.  &  D.  639.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  288,t  citing 
and  distinguishing  R.  v.  St.  Katherine's  Dock,  4  B.  &  Ad.  SGO.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M. 
121,t  and  R.  v.  Nottingham  Old  Works,  6  A.  &  E.  SSo.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  480.f  See 
tits.  "  Company,"  "  Distress,"  "  Execution." 

(0)  4  B.  &  Ad.  Seo.f     S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  121,  supra.f 

[p)  Anon.  1  Lev.  148  ;  Com.Dig.tit.  "Man."  (A.)  See  tits.  "  Alderman,""  Office." 
(Public). 

[q]  R.  v.  Rje  (Mayor),  Burr,  798  ;  2  Ld.  Ken.  4G8.  See  tit.  "'Office"  (Admission). 
(Swearing  in). 

(r)  Anon.  1  Lev.  148.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration). 

(s)  T  Mod.  365.     S.  C.  Stra.  1145;  and  see  Burr.  1013.     See  tit.  "  Mayor." 

\t)  Clitheroe's  case,  Comb.  239.  R.  v.  Montacute  (Ld.),  1  W.  Blac.  64.  S.  C.  1 
Wils.  283.     See  tits.  "  Courts  Inferior,"  "Freeman"  (Presentation  &c.),  "  Inquest." 

(u)  Ex  parte  Sandys,  1  N.  &  M.  591.t  S.  C.  B.  &  Adol.  863,  also  cited  in  R.  r. 
Bridgewater  (Mayor),  1  N.  &P.  470.t  S.  C.6A.  &  E.  339.f  See  tits.  "  Guardians  of 
Poor"  (Clerk),  "  Office"  (Freehold), "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices),  "  Vestry"  (Clerk). 

[v]  R.  V.  Manchester  (Borough),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  27,  Q.  B.  See  tit  "Compensa- 
tion" (Office). 


LANDLORD.  191 

*Keys.]     See  titles  Cliaritij;  Church  {Keys).  [*142] 

King.]     See  titles  Crown;   Customs;  Excise;  Treasury  Lords. 

King's  Beam.]  Master  Weigher  ;  Restoration. — It  appears  that  a 
mandamus  has  been  granted  to  restore  to  the  office  of  master  weigher  of 
the  King's  Beam. (it-) 

Knight.]     See  titles  Dignity ;  Knight  Temjylar. 

Knight  Templar.]  Restoration. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  restore  a 
knight  templar. (x) 

Landlord.]  Possession. — The  writ  lies  to  command  certain  magis- 
trates who  have  refused  so  to  do,  to  proceed  to  view  certain  premises  of  the 
applicant,  and  deliver  possession  thereof  to  him  as  the  landlord  thereof, 
pursuant  to  stat.  11  Geo.  2,  c.  19,  s.  16,  there  being  no  sufficient  distress 
on  the  premises,  and  the  defendant  having  deserted  them.(j/) 

But  formerly  when  the  magistrates  from  a  doubt  of  their  jurisdiction, 
incorrectly  declined  to  give  such  possession,  the  Court  usually  refused  by 
mandamus,  to  compel  them  so  to  do.(2r) 

So,  the  writ  lies  to  command  justices  to  proceed  and  give  judgment  in  a 
certain  complaint  depending  before  them  on  the  stat.  11  Geo.  2,  c.  19,  for 
the  relief  of  landlords ;  but  a  return  by  such  justices,  that  they  have  heard 
and  determined  the  complaint  that  was  before  them,  is  good. (a) 

But  it  lies  not  to  command  magistrates  to  give  restitution  under  stat. 
11  Geo.  2,  c.  19,  pursuant  to  the  order  of  certain  justices  of  assize,  as 
such  magistrates  have  no  such  jurisdiction  or  power  given  to  them  by  the 
act. (6) 

— .]  Goods. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  justices  at  sessions  to 
enter  continuances,  and  hear  an  appeal  against  an  order  of  justices,  under 
stat.  11  Geo.  2,  c.  19,  s.  4,  for  having  fraudulently  conveyed  away  goods 
to  prevent  the  landlord  distraining  the  same.(c) 

(w)  Anon.  1  Barn.  123,  135.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration). 

\x)  R.  V.  London  Waterworks,  1  Lev.  123,  per  Wyndham,  J.  See  tits.  "  Abbot," 
"Dignity,"  "Knight,"  "Monk,"  "Office,"  "Prior,"  "Visitor." 

(y)  Ex  parte  Fielder,  8  D.  535.  S.  C.  4  Jur.  507.  See  also  Ashcroft  v.  Bourne, 
3  B.  &  Ad.  G84.f  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "Forcible  Entry,  &c.,"  "  Quarter 
Sessions"  (Justices). 

(z)  8  D.  535,  supra.  But  see  R.  v.  Kent  (J.),  14  East,  395.  See  also  1  M.  &  S. 
193.  But  see  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  -which,  as  it  confers  a  lull  indemnity  for 
all  lawful  acts  done  in  execution  of  a  mandamus,  it  is  apprehended  the  Court  will 
now  more  readily  grant  the  writ. 

(a)  R.  V.  Richardson,  1  Wils.  21.  See  tits.  "Courts  Inferior,"  (Judgment,  &c.), 
"  Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices). 

(b)  Ante,  p.  10,  11.  R.  v.  Traill,  4  P.  &  D.  325.  S.  C.  12  A.  &  E.  761.t  S.  C. 
10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  56,  M.  C.     See  tit.  "Act  of  Parliament." 

(c)  R.  V.  Chesh.  (J,),  2  N.  &  M.  827.t  See  tits.  "Carriers,"  "  Quarter  Sessions" 
(Justices),  "Railway"  (Goods). 


192  tapping's    mandamus. 

Land  Tax  Co:mmissioners.]  Clerk  ;  Election. — The  writ  lies  to  com- 
mand *tlie  commissioners  of  the  land  tax  of  a  parish,  to  elect  a 
•-  J  clerk  in  the  department  of  the  rates  and  duties  on  windows,  houses, 
lights,  &c.,  it  being  a  beneficial  office  instituted  by  act  of  Parliament,  25 
Geo.  3,  c.  4,  and  having  certain  fees  and  profits  annexed  to  it.(''/) 

.]     Admission. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  the  commissioners 

of  land  tax,  to  admit  one  who  had  the  majority  of  legal  votes(e)  to  the 
office  of  clerk  of  the  commissioners. 

Lectureship.]  Lecturer. — The  writ  lies  for  a  lectureship.  (/)  In  order 
to  constitute  a  lectureship,  there  must  be  both  an  endowment  and  a  right 
to  use  the  pulpit,  (r/)  It  has,  however,  been  sometimes  endeavoured  to 
liken  the  function  of  a  lecturer  in  all  respects  to  that  office,  to  which  ?. 
person  is  admitted  by  the  institution  of  a  bishop  in  the  case  of  an  eccle- 
siastical benefice,  and  to  the  cases  of  curates,  schoolmasters,  &c.,  but  it  is 
clear  that  in  the  latter  appointments  there  are  particular  provisions  which 
certainly  do  not  apply  to  lectureships. (7i) 

The  court  of  B.  R.,  has  often  interfered  by  mandamus  in  the  case  of 
lecturers  of  parish  churches, (i)  but  as  before  said,  the  lectureship  must 
have  a  profit  or  endowment  annexed  to  it,(y)  or  the  writ  will  be  refused. 
So,  that  it  will  not  lie  in  respect  of  a  lectureship,  the  stipend  or  endow- 
ment of  which  depends  solely  upon  voluntary  contributions,  or  is  paid  out 
of  the  poor  rates,  for  the  rector  in  such  cases  may  refuse  the  use  of  the 
pulpit,  the  fee  thereof  being  in  him ;  unless  there  be  shewn  a  contrary 
immemorial  custom,  to  elect  without  such  consent. (/*;)  So,  if  it  appear, 
that  the  lectureship  was  appointed  within  time  of  memory,  and  supported 
by  voluntary  contributions  without  any  lay  fee,  or  temporal  right  in  the 


{d)  R.  V.  St.  Martin  L.  T.  Commers.,  1  T.  R.  146,  cited  in  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  2 
Show.  74,  n.  (d),  3rd  edit.  Com.  Dig.  tit  "Man."  (A.).  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  •'  Man."  (D.) 
See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Office"  (Public,  Fees). 

(e)  R.  V.  Thatclier,  1  D.  &  R.  426,f  citing  1  T.  R.  146,  supra.  In  R.  v.  Becdle, 
3  A.  &  E.  474,1  is  cited  R.  v.  Thatcher,  supra.  See  tits.  "  Office,"  (Admission), 
"  Recorder"  (Admission). 

(/)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.     See  tit.  "  Office." 

(r/)  1  Wils.  15.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C. 

(A)  R.  V.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  135. 

(t)  R.  V.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  132.  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  11, 
15.  R.  V.  London  (Ep.),  13  East,  420.  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  331,  39G.  R. 
r.  Field,  4  T.  R.  125.  R.  v.  Exeter  (Ep.),  2  East,  462.  See  also  7  East,  345;  15 
East,  132.  Vincent  v.  London  (Ep.),  P.  13  G.  1 ;  and  R.  v.  Rushworth,  Kel.  287. 
See  also  ante,  p.  26,  and  tit.  "  Office." 

{j)  R.  V.  Barker,  1  W.  Blac.  352,  per  Lord  Mansfield,  C.  J.  See  tit.  "Office" 
(Fees). 

{k)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Barker  and  Others,  1  W.  Blac.  352,  n.  (e).  Cas.  temp. 
Ld.  Holt,  433.  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  11.  S.  C.  Stra.  1192.  R.  v.  London 
(Ep.),  1  T.  R.  331.  R.  V.  Field,  4  T.  R.  125;  and  see  R.  v.  Exeter  (Ep.),  2  East, 
462.  R.  V.  London  (Ep.),  13  East,  419.  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  117. 
R.  V.  Carlisle,  2  Burn's  Eccl.  Law,  113,  ed.  1809.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Ep.),  7  East,  348, 
where  see  form  of  writ.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C. 


LECTURESHIP.  193 

party  applying,  and  that  he  had  not  the  consent  of  the  rector,  though 
chosen  by  the  parishioners  to  *be  lecturer,  the  Court  will  refuse  p^-, . ., 
it.(^)     So,  where  another  has  been  elected  by  other  of  the  inhabi-  ■-  * 

tants,  and  admitted  by  the  rector,  the  writ  will  be  refused. (m)  But  if 
there  be  a  fixed  salary  annexed  to  a  lectureship,  that  is  some  evidence  of 
a  custom,  and  as  the  rector  cannot  in  such  a  case  withhold  the  use  of  hie 
pulpit,  the  Court  will,  if  necessary,  grant  the  writ  in  aid  of  him  appointed 
lecturer.  (?i) 

This  subject  is  treated  of  as  follows  : — 

Lectureship.  I  Lectureship — Lecturer. 

Lecturer.  |  Admission    -      .   -  -  -  145 

Election  _         -         _     144  I  Compensation        .  .  -  145 

License  _         _         -     144  |  Application    -  -  -  145 

.]     Election. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  the  election 


of  a  lecture rer.(o)  But  a  writ  was  referred  to  command  the  rector  to 
certify  such  election,  in  a  case  where  there  was  no  immemorial  custom  for 
the  lecturer  to  use  the  pulpit  without  the  rector's  consent,  and  the  lec- 
turer was  paid  out  of  the  poor  rates. (p) 

.]     License. — The  Act  of  Uniformity,  13  &  14  Car.  2,  made  a 

license  necessary,  in  order  to  enable  a  lecturer  to  preach ;  and  give  autho- 
rity to  the  bishop,  &c.  to  grant  it,  if  the  applicant  appeared  to  him  to  be 
duly  qualified. (g') 

The  writ,  on  a  proper,  case  will  therefore  be  granted  to  command  a  bishop 
to  proceed  to  inquire  whether  the  prosecutor  be  duly  qualified  to  be  licensed 
as  a  lecturer  according  to  the  statute;  because  no  appeal  lies.(r)  Many 
dicta  of  the  Judges  are  also  found(s)  to  that  effect  that  the  Court  of  B. 
R.  will  not  suffer  the  bishop  to  exercise  arbitrarily  the  power  given  to  him 
by  the  statute,  but  that  where  a  person  appears  to  have  a  right,  it  will 
command  the  bishop  to  grant  a  license,  or  shew  good  reason  to  the  contrary. 
Such  a  course  does  not  shew,  that  the  judgment  of  the  bishop  upon  a  mat- 

(l)   1.3  East,  419,  supra. 

(m)  R.  V.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  11.  S.  C.  Stra.  1192.  See  1  T.  R.  331.  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.) 

{7i)  See  ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  402.  R.  v.  London  (Ep."), 
1  T.  R.  331.     See  tit.  "  Office." 

(0)  M.  T.,  4  Anne,  cited  in  R.  v.  Dr.  Bland,  1  Mod.  356,  n.  (/).  See  tit.  "  Office" 
(Election.) 

(2))  Ante,  p.  143.  R.  v.  Field,  4  T.  R.  125.  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  331 ;  2 
East,  462  ;  7  East,  345.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.     See  tit.  "Office"  (Fees,  &c.) 

[q)  R.  V.  Lichfield  (Ep.),2  Barn.  365.  Colefat  v.  Newcomb,  M.  4  Anne,  there  cited. 
As  to  the  bishop's  power  in  general,  see  Specott's  case,  5  Rep.  57  ;  13  East,  419. 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (G.)     See  tits.  "Discretion,"  "License." 

(?•)  Ante,  p.  21.  R.  v.  Litchfield  (Ep.).  2  Barn.  365.  Colefot  v.  Newcomb.  M.  4 
Anne,  there  cited.  R.  v.  Exeter  (Ep.),  2  East,  461.  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbp.), 
15  East,  132.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Ep.),  1  East,  348,  600,  per  Lord  Ellenborough,  C.  J. 
R.  V.  London  (Ep.),  13  East,  424 ;  1  T.  R.331.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (C.)  See  tits. 
"  Act  of  Pai-liament,"  "  Discretion." 

(s)  15  East,  136.  R.  v.  Loudon  (Ep.),  13  East,  420,  note.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  11,  15. 
S.  C.  Stra.  1192. 

May,  1852.— 13 


194  tapping's    mandamus. 

tcr  of  which  he  has  exclusive  cognizance,  and  which  the  Legislature  haa 
confitlcd  to  his  sole  judgment,  such  as  the  question  of  fitness  of  the  applicant 
r*li'l  of  whom  *he  is  to  approve  before  he  licenses  him;  is  not  a  good 
reason  against  the  interference  of  the  Court  by  mandamus ;(/)  and 
in  fact  there  has  never  been  an  instance  of  a  mandamus  to  compel  a  bishop 
to  approve  and  license  a  lecturer,  where  the  question  turned  on  the  appro- 
bation or  disapprobation  of  the  bishop  as  to  the  fitness  of  the  applicant  :(u) 
nor  has  there  been  a  case  where  the  Court  has  so  interfered  against  the 
bishop,  in  abrogation  of  his  judgment,  after  he  has  determined  against 
the  personal  fitness  of  the  applicant  for  the  license. (?;)  So  the  Court  will 
not  command  the  bishop  to  license,  &c.,  if  the  lecturer  have  not  a  right 
to  the  use  of  the  pulpit  ;(ro)  or  without  the  consent  of  the  rector  where 
such  lecturer  is  supported  by  voluntary  contributions,  and  there  is  no 
custom  to  elect  without  such  consent. (x) 

.]     Admission. — The  writ  has  often  been  granted  to  command  the 

admission  of  a  lecturer  to  his  office,(j/)  or  endowed  lectureship. (a) 

.]  Compensation. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  municipal  corpo- 
ration to  secure  by  bond,  under  the  corporate  seal,  the  stipend  of  a  minister 
or  lecturer  duly  entitled  to  compensation  under  stat.  5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  76, 
s.  68.(a) 

.]     Application. — Some  of  the  older  cases  have  decided,  that  inas- 

{t)  Ante,  p.  12,  13.  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  117,  123,  124,  per 
Lord  Ellenborough,  C.  J.  R.  v.  St.  Bartholomew,  (Churchwardens),  3  Salk.  86. 
S.  C.  Holt.  Rep.  418.  Turton  v.  Reynolds,  12  Mod.  433 ;  and  see  Ld.  Raym.  1206. 
R.  v.  Blooer,  Burr.  1045;  1  Wils.  11.  R.  v.  Gloucester  (Ep.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  162. 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (C.)  See  tits.  "Alehouse,"  "  Discretion,"  "  School"  (School- 
master License). 

(m)  Ante,  p.  14,  15.  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  138,  139,  per  Lord 
Ellenborough,  C.  J. 

{v)  15  East,  124,  supra.  And  Lord  Ellenborough,  in  15  East,  150,  while  com- 
menting upon  R.  V.  Blooer,  Burr.  1045,  (which  was  an  application  for  a  mandamus 
to  a  parishioner  and  an  inhabitant  of  a  chapelry,  to  restore  a  curate  to  a  curacy 
from  which  he  had  been  forcibly  turned  and  kept  out,  no  rights  or  dues  of  the 
ordinary  as  such,  being  in  question,)  remarked,  "that  Lord  Mansfield  appeared  in 
that  case  to  have  said,  "  If  the  bishop  had  refused  without  cause  to  license  the  pro- 
secutor, he  might  have  had  a  mandamus  to  compel  the  ordinary  to  grant  him  a 
license."  Andi  (said  Lord  Ellenborough)  indeed,  as  it  is  the  party's  only  remedy, 
if  the  license  be  refused  ivithout  a  cause ;  the  bishop  being  to  act  there  as  in  the 
case  of  an  institution  ;  if,  therefore,  he  causelessly  refused  the  license,  the  Court 
would  grant  the  mandamus,  and  if  the  bishop  could  not  or  would  not  assign  any 
cause,  he  might  be  compelled  to  admit  him.  But  bow  is  that  argument  to  be  ex- 
tended to  a  case  where  the  bishop  assigns  the  only  cause  of  rejection  which  the 
statute  requires  to  exist,  viz.,  the  disapprobation  of  the  person  applying ;  and  when 
he  satisfies  the  Court,  by  the  most  explicit  and  solemn  declaration,  that  this  disap- 
probation is  the  result  of  deliberate  inquiry  and  conscientious  judgment?"  ,  See 
tits.  "Alehouse,"  "  Discretion." 

[w)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  11.  S.  C.  nom.  Lecturer  of 
St.  Anne,  Stra.  1192. 

(x)  Ante,  p.  143,  144.     R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  331. 

(y)  R.  V.  Barker,  Burr.  1267,  1268,  1269,  1270,  per  Lord  Mansfield,  C.  J.  See 
tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Office"  (Admission). 

(z)  R.  V.  Bathurst,  1  W.  Blac.  209.     R.  v.  Barker,  1  W.  Blac.  352,  n.  (e). 

(a)  R.  V.  Liverpool  (Mayor),  3  N.  &  P.  280.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  I76.t  See  tit. 
"  Compensation"  (Office  Bond). 


LEGACY,     ETC.  195 

much  as  the  statute  requires  that  the  applicant  must  be  first  approved  and 
thereunto  licensed  by  the  archbishop  of  the  province  or  bishop  of  the 
*diocese,  &c.,  the  Court  will  not  entertain  a  motion  for  a  man-  r*-i4^-i 
damns  to  the  bishop  to  license  a  lecturer  appointed  by  the  parish, 
upon  the  previous  refusal  of  the  bishop  to  do  so,  upon  the  alleged  ground 
of  unfitness ;  unless  it  be  shewn  that  the  like  application  has  also  been 
made  to  the  archbishop  and  rejected  by  him  :  for  as  the  Court  will  only 
grant  a  mandamus  where  the  party  has  no  other  remedy,  it  must  be  satis- 
fied that  an  endeavour  has  been  made  to  procure  a  license  from  those  who 
have  the  power  to  grant  it.(i). 

Leet  Court.]  See  titles  Courts  Inferior  (^Manor  Courts) ;  Manor 
(Leet). 

Leet  Court,  Steward.]     See  tit.  Manor  {Leet). 

Legacy.]  The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the  delivery  or  payment 
of  a  specific  legacy  or  sum  of  money  to  a  particular  legatee, (c)  because 
there  is  no  legal  right,  but  merely  an  equitable  one,(f?)  over  which  the 
Court  of  Equity  has  sole  and  competent  jurisdiction. (e) 

Librarian  of  College.]     See  tit.  College  (Lihrarian). 

License.]  See  titles  Alehouses;  Discretion;  Lectureship  [License); 
Manor  (^License)  ;  Physicians'  (^College);   School  [Schoolmaster). 

License  to  Demise.]     See  titles  Discretion  ;  Manor  [License). 

License  to  Dig,  &c.]     See  titles  Discretion  ;  Manor  [License). 

Lighting  Rate.]  See  titles  Borough  [Rate) ;  County  [Rate) ; 
Drainage  [Rate) ;    Poor  [Rate) ;  Parish  [Rate) ;  Rate. 

Livery.]  Municipal  Corporation,  Admission. — The  writ  lies  to  admit 
to  the  ofiice  of  liveryman  of  a  municipal  corporation. (/) 

.]  Company,  Admission. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  admis- 
sion to  the  office  of  liveryman  of  a  company.  (^) 

(b)  13  East,  418,  supra.  R.  v.  Price,  11  A.  &  E.  735.f  See  post,  tit.  "  Appli- 
tion"  (Demand  and  Refusal). 

(c)  See  Blackborongh  v.  Davis,  1  P.  Wms.  46;  2  Vern.  710.  Trevor  v.  Trevor, 
1  P.  Wms.  628.     See  tit.  "Administration,"  "Will." 

(d)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.     See  tit.  "  Trust." 

(e)  Ante,  p.  22,  23.     See  post,  tit.  "  Writ"  (Form  of.) 

(/)  See  Stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App.  Taverner's  case,  Rajm.  446,  where  see  a 
form  of  return.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  See  tits.  "  Company,"  "Corporation" 
(Municipal),  "  Francliise,"  "Freedom,"  "Freeman,"  "Office"  (Admission). 

(ff)  Taverner's  case,  Raym.  446,  and  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  461,  where  see  forms  of  writs 
and  return.  See  tits.  "  Company,"  "  Franchise,"  "  Freedom,"  "  Freemen,"  "  Office" 
(  Admission). 


196  tapping's    mandamus. 

Livings.]  Inspection  of  Register. — The  writ  will  be  granted  to  com- 
mand a  bishop  to  allow  inspection  of  his  register  of  presentations  and 
institutions  *to  livings  in  his  diocese,  and  to  allow  copies  to  be 
L  -^"^ '  J  taken  of  thera  by  a  person  claiming  a  right  of  patronage  ;  applica- 
tion for  such  inspection  and  copy  having  been  made  previously  and  refus- 
ed :  and  this,  although  the  bishop  also  claim  a  right  to  collate  to  such 
liviniz.  For  a  bishop's  register  of  institutions,  &c.  is  kept  for  the  use  of 
all  persons  claiming  title  to  livings  in  the  diocese,  and  therefore  being  for 
the  benefit  of  the  public  at  large,  it  is  of  a  public  nature ;  and  thus,  un- 
like the  books  of  a  corporation,  which  are  kept  for  the  use  of  the  body  at 
lar^e,  or  that  of  the  individual  members,  and  not  for  the  use  of  strangers  ; 
80  also  of  parish  books.  Such  registers  ought,  therefore,  to  be  accessible 
to  every  individual  who  has,  or  who  can  by  possibility  claim  title  to  the 
presentation  to  a  living  with  the  diocese. (/) 

Loans  for  Churches.]     See  tit.  Church  (Loan). 

Loans  FOR  Parishes.]     See  tits.  Parish  {Loan). 

London.]  See  titles  Ci(^  WorJcs,  (  Cieric  of)  ;  Courts  Inferior  (Lord 
Mayor's  Court,  Requests,  t&c). 

Lord  Mayor's  Court.]     See  titles  Attorney ;  Courts  (Inferior). 

Lunatic]  Removal,  (i-c.  The  writ  lies  to  command  the  hearing  of  an 
appeal  against  an  order  adjudicating  the  settlement  or  removal  of  a  pauper 
lunatic, (</)  or  against  an  order  for  the  payment  of  money  for  the  care  and 
guardianship  of  a  pauper  lunatic. (^) 

Mace.]  See  titles  Borough  ;  Corporation  Municipal  (Insignia)  ;  In- 
signia ;  Mayor. 

Mandamus.]  The  writ  lies  to  enforce  the  result  of  a  previous  manda- 
mus. Thus,  where  a  compensation  jury  having  met  and  assessed  compen- 
sation in  pursuance  of  a  mandamus,  the  Court,  upon  payment  being  re- 

(/)  R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  8  B.  &  C.  112.f  S.  C.  2  M.  &  R.  127.  R.  v.  Staffordsh. 
(J.),  6  A.  &  E.  89.f  Southampton  (Mayor)  v.  Graves,  8  T.  R.  590.  May  v.  Gwynne, 
4B.  &A.  .301.  Cox  V.  Copping,  Ld.  Raym.  337.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  See 
tits.  '•Booi<s,"  "Company,"  "Corporations  Municipal"  (Books,  &c.),  "County," 
"Manor"  (Rolls,  &c.),  "  Parson." 

(-/)  R.  V.  Kent  (J.),  2  Q.  B.  GSG.f  S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  152.  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  26, 
M.  C.  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  52,  M.  C.  R.  v.  Radnorsh.  (J.),  15 
L.  J.,  N.  S.  151,  M.  C.  R.  V.  York  (Recorder),  4  D.  &  L.  376.  S.  C.  16  L.  J.,  N. 
S.  22,  M.  C.  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  M.  C.  171,  where  see  form  of 
writ.     See  tits.  "Poor,"  (Removal,  Appeal),  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

(/i)  R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  104,  M.  C.  See  tit.  "Poor"  (Relief,  &c.. 
Costs). 


MANOR. 


197 


fused,  granted  a  mandamus  to  command  it.(/')     But  a  mandamus  will  not 
lie  for  *the  costs  of  a  former  mandamus  if  there  be  a  specific  sta- 


tutory remedy  for  such  costs. (_y') 


[*148] 


Manor.]     This  most  important  and  extensive  subject  is  arranged  aa 
follows  : — 


Manor 

MANOR. 

1st  Court  Leet 

. 

148 

4th.  Bailiff     - 

- 

153 

Holding  Court    - 

- 

148 

5th.  Custom    - 

- 

153 

Jury             _         -         . 

. 

149 

6th.  Licenses 

- 

153 

Business  of  Court 

_ 

149 

To  demise    - 

- 

153 

Appointing  officers 

_ 

149 

To  dig  earth 

- 

153 

Presentments 

_ 

150 

Ttli.  Admittance 

- 

154 

Plaint 

_ 

150 

Jurisdiction  of  B.  R. 

- 

154 

Resiant 

_ 

150 

When  granted 

- 

155 

Oath  of  allegiance 

- 

151 

When  refused 

- 

15t 

Records  of  Court 

- 

151 

Royal  manor 

- 

15T 

Inspection,  &c. 

- 

151 

Fines 

- 

158 

Officers  of  Court 

- 

151 

Application  for 

writ 

158 

StCAvard 

_ 

151 

Affidavits 

- 

158 

Admission 

_ 

151 

Rule    - 

- 

158 

Restoration    - 

_ 

151 

P'orm  of  writ 

- 

158 

2nd.  Court  Baron 

_ 

151 

Returns 

- 

159 

Holding  Court     - 

_ 

151 

8th.  Surrender 

- 

159 

Business  of  Court 

. 

152 

Apjdication  for 

writ 

161 

Presentments 

- 

152 

Rule      - 

- 

161 

Officers  of  Court 

■  _ 

152 

Form  of  writ 

- 

161 

Steward 

- 

152 

Returns 

- 

161 

Swearing  In  - 

_ 

153 

9th.  Court  Rolls      - 

- 

161 

Restoration    - 

. 

153 

Delivery 

- 

161 

3rd.  Court  Copyliold 

- 

153 

Inspection 

- 

161 

Officers  of  Court 

- 

153 

Application  for 

writ 

163 

Steward 

- 

153 

Rule     - 

- 

164 

.1     1st.  Court  Leet. 

Holdina.- 

—The  Stat.  11  Geo.  1, 

c.  4,  pro 

vides 

in  certain  cases,  a  remedy  by  mandamus,  where  the  lord  neglects  to  hold  a 
Court,  or  where  something  is  wrongly  done  or  omitted  at  such  a  Court 
when  holdcn.(^;)  But  generally  as  the  holding  of  a  Court  Leet,  for  all 
purposes,  is  for  the  public  good,  it  having  been  instituted  for  the  more  con- 
venient distribution  of  public  justice,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will,  when  neces- 
sary, grant  a  mandamus  to  command  the  holding  of  such  a  QoMvi  forthwith, (J) 


(«■)  R.  V.  Nottingham  Waterworks,  6  A.  &  E.  335.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &P.  480.t  Sec  tits. 
"Compensation"  (Payment),  "  Execution,"  and  ante,  p.  10,  23. 

[j)  Note  {i),  supra.  See  tits.  "  Company"  (Execution),  "  Costs."  See  ante,  p. 
58,  n.  if). 

{k)  See  Stat.  App.  R.  v.  Montacute  (Ld.),  1  W.  Blac.  60,  n.  {a).  S.  C.  1  Wils. 
283.  See  tits.  "  Corporation  Municipal"  (Duties,  &c.),  "  Courts  Inferior"  (Holding 
Courts),  and  ante,  p.  10. 

a.)  1  W.  Blac.  63.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283,  supra.  R.  v.  Milvcrton  (Manor),  3  A.  &E. 
284.1  S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  282.  Scriven  on  Copyhold,  532,  n.  {g).  R.  v.  Colebrooke, 
2  Ld.  Ken.  163.  See  tits.  "Corporation"  (Municipal),  "  Courts  Inferior"  (Ilohring 
Courts).  As  to  nonuser  of  Courts,  see  ante,  p.  108,  and  infra,  "Plaint,"  "  Cmir^ 
Baron." 


198  tapping's   mandamus. 

pfliOl  ^^'  ^^^^S  *clear  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  a  competent  jurisdic- 
^  tion  for  such  purpose. (?n)     Thus  it  will  be  granted  to  command  a 

municipal  corporation  to  permit  and  allow  the  holding  of  a  Court  Leet  in 
their  Corporation  Hall,  such  being  the  accustomed  place,  by  immemorial 
usage  and  prescription  ;(?i)  and  for  that  purpose  will  command  a  delivery 
to  the  lord  of  the  manor,  of  the  key  of  the  town  hall,(o)  notwithstanding 
the  lord  be  not  legally  obliged  to  hold  his  court  therein.  (^)  Thus,  where 
the  bailiffs  and  burgesses  of  an  ancient  borough,  had  been  time  immemo- 
rially  lords  of  the  manor  and  owners  of  the  guildhall  within  the  borough  j 
and  by  their  charter  power  was  granted  to  them  to  hold  manor  Courts  in 
the  guildhall  twice  in  every  year,  as  of  ancient  time;  which,  until  1807 
had  been  immemorially  so  held.  In  1807,  certain  commissioners,  under 
an  inclosure  act,  awarded  to  the  prosecutor,  all  the  said  manor,  with  the 
rights,  members,  courts,  view  of  frankpledge,  &c.,  excepting  to  the  haUiffs 
and  htoyesses  the  guildhall,  &c.  The  prosecutor,  until  1821,  had  held 
the  Courts  Leet  in  the  guildhall,  and  being  then  obstructed,  the  Court 
granted  him  a  writ  of  mandamus  to  command  the  bailiffs  and  burgesses, 
to  allow  the  manor  Courts  to  be  held  therein. (5') 

.]     .     Jury. — So  a  mandamus  will  be  granted   to  command 

the  attendance  of  the  tenants  of  a  manor,  at  the  Court  Leet,  to  make  a 
jury.(;')  Yet  it  lies  not  to  the  jurors,  by  name,  to  appear  and  form  a 
jury.(s)  But  on  the  other  hand,  members  of  a  municipal  corporation,  if 
they  be  entitled,  may  have  granted  to  them  a  mandamus  to  be  summoned 
on  the  jury  of  a  Court  Leet.(<) 

.]     .     Business  of  Court;  Appointment  of  Officers,  &c. — 

The  writ  will  also  be  granted  to  command  the  steward  of  a  Court  Leet  to 
do  at  such  Court  any  act  within  his  jurisdiction,  and  to  transact  the 
business  thereof  ;(?<)  as   to   appoint  any  or  all  of  the  necessary  officers, 

(m)  Ante,  p.  11,  12,  93,  108.  R.  y.  Milverton  (Manor),  3  A.  &  E.  284,  286.f  R. 
V.  Willis,  Andr.  279,  and  the  argument  there.  S.  C.  7  Mod.  261.  R.  v.  Grantham 
(Corp.),  2  W.  Blac.  716.  R.  v.  Ilchester  (Bailiffs),  2  D.  &  R.  724.t  S.  C.  4  D.  & 
R.  326.t     S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  764-1 

[n]  2  W.  Blac.  715  ;  2  D.  &  R.  725.f  S.  C.  4  I).  &  R.  326.  S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  764,f 
supra.  R.  v.  Montacute  (Lord),  1  W.  Blac.  64,  n.  [l).  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  Scriv.  on  Copyh.  732,  n.  (g),  4th  edit.  See  ante,  tit.  "  Cus- 
tom,/' and  infra,  "  Court  Baron." 

(0)  R.  V.  Wigan  (Mayor),  T.  17  Geo.  2,  1  Wils.  76,  cited  in  2  D.  &  R.  T25.t  S. 
C.  4  D.  &  R.  324.t     S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  764,f  supra.     See  tit.  "  Keys." 

(p)  2  B.  &  C.  764,f  supra. 

(q)  R.  V.  Ilchester  (Bailiffs),  2  D.  &  R.  724.f  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  324.t  S.  C.  2  B. 
k  C.  764.t 

(r)  Wigan's  case,  Str.  1207.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  16.  R.  t.  Montacute  (Lord),  1  W. 
Blac.  64,  n.  {I).  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  See  tits.  "Jury," 
"  Inquest." 

(«)  R.  V.  Bankes,  1  W.  Blac.  451,  452.     S.  C.  Burr.  1452 ;  1  W.  Blac.  64,  n.  (I), 
BDpra.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D).    Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A). 
.    (/)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.     R.  v.  Grantham  (Corp.),  2  W.  Blac.  715.     R.  v.  Willis, 
Andr.  279.    Wigan's  case,  Stra.  1207.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.) 

(u)  Cited  in  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  14.  See  tits.  "Corporation"  (Munici- 
pal), p.  93,  "  Courts"  (Inferior),  and  see  ante,  p.  11. 


MANOR.  199 

usually  and  legally  appointed  *thereat.(v)     So  it  has  been  grant-  t^ikq-i 
ed  to  command  the  lord  of  a  manor  to  hold  a  Court  Leet,  and  to 
summon  a  jury  to  attend  thereat,  in  order  to  elect  a  mayor. («;) 

.]     Presentments. — The  writ  has  also  been  granted  in  pursuance 

of  Stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  to  command  the  steward  of  a  Court  Leet,  to  hold 
a  Court,  and  to  charge  the  jury  to  m^\Q  proper  presentments,  and  that 
they,  being  sworn,  may  present  the  prosecutor  of  the  writ,  as  a  person 
duly  elected  mayor. (a;)  But  it  would  seem  to  be  a  good  return  to  such 
a  writ  that  the  prosecutor  was  not  duly  qualified,  or  not  elected. (^) 

.]     Plaint. — It  is  clearly  settled  that  a  mandamus  will  be  granted 

to  command  the  steward  and  suitors  of  a  manor  Court,  to  receive  and 
admit  a  certain  plaint,  and  issue  process  from  the  said  Court  thereon,  and 
to  proceed  to  hear  and  determine  the  same,  pursuant  to  the  manor  charter, 
and  in  such  case  it  is  also  clear  that  the  nonuser  of  the  Court,  for  any 
period  of  time,  does  not  deprive  the  steward,  &c.  of  the  power,  nor  relieve 
him  from  the  necessity  to  hold  such  Court,  notwithstanding  the  words  of 
the  charter  may  be,  literally,  permissive  merely,  for  they  are,  in  law, 
obligatory;  the  Court  having  been  instituted  for  the  public  benefit. (2) 
So  it  lies  to  command  the  lord  of  a  manor  and  his  steward  to  proceed  upon 
a  plaint,  in  the  nature  of  a  writ  of  right  patent  at  the  common  law.  (a) 
But  a  return  to  such  a  mandamus,  that  the  Court  had  adjudicated  (if 
in  fact  it  have  done  so,)  whether  by  quashing  for  informality  or  other- 
wise, is  good,  as  the  Court  cannot,  upon  a  return,  inquire  whether  or  not 
the  adjudication  be  erroneous  or  informal,  and  thereby  review  it;(i)  for 
in  such  case  relief  must  be  sought  by  a  proceeding  in  the  nature  of  a  peti- 
tion of  right,  or  in  equity. 

.]  Resiant;  Enrolling  and  Sioearimj  in. — The  writ  lies  to  com- 
mand the  mayor  and  steward  of  a  Borough  Court  Leet,  to  enrol  and  swear 
one  a  resiant  and  burgess  of  the  borough,  if  thereby  a  right,  as  to  vote 
for  members  of  Parliament,  be  gained ;  the  connection,  however,  between 

iv)  R.  V.  Milverton  (Manor),  3  A.  &  E.  284,  286.f     See  tit.  "  Constable." 

(w)  R.  V.  Bankes,  1  W.  Blac.  444.     S.  C.  Burr.  1452.     See  stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4, 

s.  3,  App.     Bull.  N.  P.  196,  197.     R.  v.  Willis,  Andr.  279.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 

See  tits.  "Mayor,"  "  Office"  (Election). 

(z)  R.  V.  Willis,  7  Mod.  261.     S.   0.  Andr.  279.     Bull.  N.  P.  200.     Clitheroe's 

case,  Comb.   239.      Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A).      See  tits.  "Inquest,"  "Mayor," 

"  Presentment,"  "  Portreeve." 

(y)  7  Mod.  261,  supra.     See  tit.  "Churchwarden,"  and  post,  tit.  "Return." 

[z)  See  post,  96,  (Bye-law).     R.  v.  Havering  (Steward),  5  B.  &  A.  691,  where 

there  was  a  nonuser  for  above  fifty  years;  and  see  R.  v.  Hastings  (Mayor),  5  B.  & 

A.  692,  n.  («),  where  there  was  a  nonuser  for  above  thirty  years.  Scriven  on  Copy- 
hold, 601,  602,  4th  edit.  Ante,  p.  108,  n.  (s).  See  tit.  "  Courts  Inferior"  (Holding 
Court,  Plaint),  where  see  other  returns. 

(rt)  Ante,  p.  109.  R.  v.  Old  Hall  (Manor),  2  P.  &  D.  515.  S.  C.  10  A.  &  E.  248.t 
S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  650;  3  Jur.  868,  where  see  the  form  of  a  writ  and  return.    F.  N. 

B.  3,  E.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Droit,"  (B.  3).  Scriven  on  Copyhold,  630,  4th  edit.  See 
tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices). 

{b)  Ante,  p.  22.  2  P.  &  D.  515.  S.  C.  10  A.  &  E.  248,f  supra.  R.  v.  Richard- 
son, 1  Wils.  21.  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  7  T.  R.  467.  Scriven  on  Copyhold,  489, 
530,  531,  4th  edit.  See  tits.  "  Courts  Inferior"  (Plaint,  Judgment,  &c.,)  "Quarter 
Sessions"  (Review). 


200  tapping's    mandamus. 

r+lfintlitJ  Icct  and  '''tlic  corporation,  must  be  sliown  by  affidavit.  So 
that  where  an  inhabitant  of  a  borough  applies  for  a  mandamus  to 
the  mayor  and  steward  of  a  Borough  Court  Lcet,  to  enrol  him  as  a  re- 
siant,  &c.,  but  did  not  make  out  an  inchoate  right  in  every  inhabitant  to 
be  a  burgess,  or  that  any  connection  existed  between  the  corporation  and 
the  Court  Lcet,  as  would  make  swearing  and  enrolment  at  the  latter,  the 
means  of  perfecting  such  right,  the  Court  refused  the  writ.(r) 

.]      Oath  of  Allexjiance. — The  Court  will  not  now  grant  the  writ 

of  mandamus,  to  command  the  lord  of  a  manor  to  hold  a  Court  Leet  for 
the  purpose  of  administering  the  oath  of  allegiance,  to  one  desirous  of  tak- 
ing it,  for  he  will  be  exempted  from  any  penalty  for  not  taking  it,  by 
shewing  that  he  has  offered  to  take  it.(fZ) 

.]     Records  of  Leet  ;  Inspection,  &c. — The  Court  will  grant  a  writ 

of  mandamus,  to  allow  an  inspection  of  the  records  of  a  Court  Leet,  if  the 
applicant  for  the  writ  assign  some  satisfactory  reason  for  inspection,  and 
it  be  refused  without  sufficient  reason. (e) 

■]      Officers  of  Court;  Steicard. — It  has  been  clearly  settled  by 

abundance  of  authority,  that  a  mandamus  will  be  granted  for  the  office  of 
steward  of  a  Court  Leet,  it  not  being  a  place  of  mere  service,  but  a  public 
office,  which  concerns  the  administration  of  justice,  he  being  the  Judge  of 
his  Court. (/) 

.]     Aclinission. — So   a  mandamus  lies  to  admit  to  the  office  of 

steward  of  a  leet.(^) 

.]     Restoration. — So  it  lies  to  restore  the  steward   of  a  Court 

Leet,  if  improperly  deprived, (A)  and  this,  although  he  is  not  a  sworn 
officer,  (i) 

.]     2nd.  Court  Baron,   Holding. — A  writ  of  mandamus  will,  if 

the  lord  of  a  manor  neglect  to  hold  the  usual  Courts  Baron,  be  granted  to 

[c)  Ante,  p.  27,  28,  54.  R.  v.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  C.  GTT.f  R.  v.  Bar- 
nard's Inn,  5  A.  &  E.  24.  Scriv.  on  Copyh.  713,  n.'(e),  4th  edit.  See  tit.  "  Bur- 
gess" (Admission.) 

{(1)  Ante,  p.  15.  R.  v.  Maidstone  (Mayor),  6  D.  &  R.  334,  335,f  per  Abbott,  C. 
J.    Scriv.  on  Copj'h.  532,  n.(^),  4tli  edit. 

(c)  G  D.  &  R.  334,1  supra  :  and  see  cases  cited  336,  n.(fl).  Scriv.  on  Copyh.  532, 
!!.(.(/),  4th  edit.  See  tits.  "Accounts,"  "Books,  &c.,"  "  Corporation  jMunicipal" 
(Books,  Inspection),  "  Courts"  (Inferior),  "Livings,"  "Quarter Sessions"  (Records). 

(/)  Ante,  p.  12.  Middleton's  case,  1  Sid  169.  Anon.,  12  Mod.  666,  Holt,  C.  J., 
saying,  that  he  did  not  care  to  grant  it  for  the  steward  of  a  leet.  Stamp's  case,  1  ■ 
Sid.  40,  where  the  Court  is  reported  to  have  doubted  whether  it  lay  in  such  case. 
S.  C.  Ray.  12.  S.  C.  1  Keb,  5.  R.  v.  Kingscleere  (Churchwardens),  2  Lev.  18. 
Hurst's  case,  1  Keb,  354.  R.  v.  Raines,  3  Salic.  233,  11,  13.  Anon.  1  Freem.  21. 
The  Protector  v.  Craford,  Sty.  457.  See  Anon.,  12  Mod.  666.  See  Scriven  on  Copy- 
hold, 527,  608,  703,  704;  2  Sid.  112;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (C).    See  tit.  "Office." 

{>j)  Stamp's  case,  Raym.  12.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  40.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  5.  Sec  R.  r.  Cam- 
bridge (V.  C),  Burr.  1649.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Admission). 

{h)  Stamp's  Case,  1  Sid.  40.  S.  C.  Raym.  12.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  5.  Middleton's  case, 
I  Sid.  169;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  ;  1  Sid.  169,  approved  in  2  T.  R.  183,  n. 
He's  case,  1  Vent.  153,  per  Twisden,  J.  Scriven  on  Copyliold,  527,  608,  703,  704. 
See  tit  "Office"  (Restoration). 

(i)  Per  Glvn,  C.  J.  City  Works  case,  2  Sid.  112.  See  also  Sty.  457,  supra.  See 
tit.  "  Office"  (Sworn  Officer). 


MANOR.  201 

*coinraancl  him  to  hold  them,  and  to  do  justice  to  his  tenants. (y)  ^^.j^^rn-. 
So  it  lies  to  command  a  corporation,  to  allow  a  lord  and  steward  of  L 
a  manor  to  hold  a  Court,  in  their  corporation  hall,  he  being  entitled  so  to 
do,  that  being  the  accustomed  place  by  immemorial  usage  and  prescrip- 
tion. (/.•) 

-.]     Business  of  Courts;  Presentments. — The  writ  lies  to  command 

the  lord  and  steward  of  a  manor,  and  certain  persons  being  homagers,  (who 
in  such  case  are  merely  ministerial  officers),  to  hold  a  Court  Baron,  and 
present  certain  conveyances  of  the  purchasers  of  burgage  tenements,  w^here- 
by  they  are  entitled  to  be  sworn  in  burgesses  of  the  corporation,  and  to 
vote  for  members  of  Parliament,  &c.,  notwithstanding  it  do  not  appear 
whether  such  conveyances  be  legal  or  not,  or  they  be  even  charged  to  be 
fraudulent.  The  affidavits  should  shew  that  the  several  conveyances  are 
duly  executed,  and  that  they  have  been  offered  at  a  general  Court  to  be 
presented,  but  have  been  refused  by  the  homage.  If,  however,  there  have 
not  been  an  alienation,  or  the  conveyances  be  illegal,  either  fact  will  form 
matter  of  return  to  the  writ.(?) 

•]      Officers  of  Court;  Steicard. — It  seems,  from  a  long  current  of 

authorities,  that  the  writ  of  mandamus  does  not  lie  for  the  office  of  steward 
of  a  Court  Baron,  because  it  is  a  place  of  mere  private  jurisdiction,  and 
does  not  concern  the  administration  of  justice. (m) 

There  are  however,  a  few  dicta  which  have,  probably,  through  the  mis- 
take or  ignorance  of  the  reporters,  crept  into  some  of  the  cases,  but  it  is 
apprehended,  they  are  not  of  sufficient  weight  to  impugn  the  above  doc- 
trine, that  the  writ  will  not  \\e.(n).  It  has  however,  been  held,  that  if  the 
steward  be  *not  at  will  only,  but  has  a  patent  for  life,  that  in  such 
case  the  writ  will  lie.(o) 

0")  Ante,  p.  11,  105.  Old.  Nat.  Br.3,  e,  12  b.,  p.  6,  26,8tli  edit.,  4to.  R.  v.  Mont- 
acute  (Lord),  1  W.  Blac.  63,  64.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283  ;  2  Roll.  107,  per  Montague,  C. 
J.  R.  V.  Surrey  (J.),  2  Show.  74,  n.  (d),  3rd  edit.  Seesupra,  " Court Leet,"  iufra, 
"  Admittance,"  "  Surrender,"  and  ante,  tit.  "  Courts  Inferior." 

{k}  R.  V.  Grantham  (Corp.),  1  W.  Blac.  715  ;  1  W.  Blac.  64,  n.  {I).  S.  C.  1  Wils. 
283,  supra.     See  supra,  "Court  Leet,"  and  ante,  tit.  "Custom." 

h)  Ante,  p.  55.  R.  v.  Montacute  (Lord),  1  W.  Blac.  60.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.  Cli- 
thero's  case.  Comb.  239.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A).  See  tits.  "Burgess,  "  Pre- 
fentment,"  "  Vote." 

(m)  Stamp's  case,  1  Sid.  40  ;  this  was  a  judgment  of  a  full  Court.  S.  C.  Raym. 
12.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  5,  where,  per  Twisden,  J.,  "  that  in  Trafford's  case  it  was  expressly 
adjudged,  that  a  mandamus  would  not  lie  for  the  steward  of  a  Court  Baron  solely. 
See  R.  V.  Lee,  1  Show.  252.  S.  C.  3  Lev.  309.  S.  C.  3  Mod.  334.  R.  v.  Kingscleere 
(Churchwardens),  2  Lev.  18.  Middleton's  case,  1  Sid.  169.  Hurst's  case,  1  Keb. 
354;  Fitzg.  194,  195;  Holt,  442;  Scriven  on  Copyhold,  526,  527,  608.  Spealvcr  v. 
Styaut,  Comb.  127,  per  Eyres,  J.  Anon.,  12  Mod.  666.  See  supra  "Leet  Steward," 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (C).     See  tit.  "  Office." 

(«)  Thus  in  Isle's  case,  2  Keb.  820,  Hale,  C.  J.,  "conceived  a  mandamus  would 
lie  for  steward  of  a  Court  Baron  being  register,  though  no  Judge ;"  and  see  S.  C.  1 
Vent.  153,  per  Hale,  C.  J.  In  Anon.,  Freem.  21,  Hale,  C.  J.,  is  made  to  say,  "  that 
the  writ  will  lie  for  the  steward  of  a  Court  Baron,"  but  upon  reference  to  a  concur- 
rent report  of  the  same  case,  2  Lev.  18,  the  same  Judge  is  made  to  say  it  will  not 
lie,  which  is  also  confirmed  by  the  authorities  cited  in  the  margin  of  the  report  in 
Freem. ;  also  see  The  Protector  v.  Craford,  Sty.  457,  per  Glyn,  0.  J.  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"Man."  (C). 

(o)  Per  Hole,  C.  J.,  2  Lev.  18.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.  B.) 


202  tapping's    mandamus. 

.]     Swearing  in. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the  swearing 


in  of  the  steward  of  a  Court  Baron. (^)). 

.]  Restoration. — Neither  does  the  writ  lie  to  command  a  restora- 
tion of  the  steward  of  a  Court  Baron  to  his  place. (j) 

.]     3rd.  Coj>yliold  Court  ;    Officers  of  Court  ;   Steward. — It  has 

been  decided  by  one  case,  that  a  mandamus  does  not  lie  to  swear  in  a  stew- 
ward  of  a  copyhold  Court,  he  being  a  mere  private  officer  to  do  service  for 
the  lord.(r) 

.]     4th.  Bailiff. — It  appears  that  this  writ  will  not  be  granted  at 

the  instance  of  a  bailiff  of  a  raanor,(.s)  who  seems  originally  to  have  been 
a  very  inferior  officer,  and  appointable  by  parol. 

.]     5th.  Custom. — It  would  seem  that  a  mandamus  will  be  granted 

to  command  the  tenants  of  a  manor  to  present  a  memorial  custom. (^) 

.]     6th.  Licenses. — No  instance  can  be  found  of  a  mandamus  having 

been  granted  to  command  the  lord  of  a  manor,  under  any  circumstances, 
to  grant  a  license  for  the  doing  of  any  particular  act,  for  the  word  "  license" 
ex  vi  termini  imports  "  discretion," (u)  which  cannot  be  interfered  with 
by  mandamus. 

.]     to  demise. — So  the  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the 

lord  of  a  manor  to  grant  a  license  to  a  copyholder,  to  demise  his  copyhold 
for  a  term  of  years  on  an  alleged  custom,  that  the  tenant  may  demise  for 
three  years  without  license,  and  that  for  a  license  to  demise  for  a  longer 
period  of  time,  the  lord  shall  have  a  sum  certain  for  every  year  of  such 
extended  period. (z;) 

.].     to  dig  brick  earth. — The  writ  has  been  held  to  lie  to 

command*  the  lord  of  a  manor  to  grant  a  customary  license,  as  for 
L  -"a  tenant  to  dig  brick  earth  for  the  purpose  of  making  bricks  on 
payment  of  a  sum  certain.     Yet  if  there  be  no  such  custom,  but  evidence 


[p]  Steward's  case,  Comb.  127,  per  Eyres,  J.;  Holt,  442.  See  tit.  "Office" 
(Swearing  in). 

{q)  Stamp's  case,  1  Sid.  40;  this  was  the  judgment  of  a  full  Court.  S.  CRajm. 
12.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  5,  where,  per  Twisden,  J.,  "  that  in  TrafFord's  case  it  was  express- 
ly adjudged,  that  a  mandamus  would  not  lie  for  the  steward  of  a  Court  Baron 
merely."  See  R.  v.  Kingscleere  (Churchwardens),  where  Hale,  C.  J.,  said,  "that  it 
lay  to  restore  the  steward  of  a  Court  Baron,  if  he  be  not  at  will  merely,  because  he 
is  an  officer  of  justice.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  182,  n.  (6),  citing  3  Lev.  309. 
See  Anon.,  12  Mod.  666;  Fitzg.  194,  195.  He's  case,  1  Vent.  153.  Scriven  on 
Copyhold,  526,  527,  607.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration). 

(r)  Anon.,  12  Mod.  666.  5  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.  B.)  See  Scriv.  on  Copyh. 
608,  n.,  where  it  is  called  a  customary  Court.  See  supra,  "  Steward  of  a  Court 
Baron."     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Public). 

(s)  Bailiffs  case,  Comb.  133 ;  this  case  is  not  noticed  in  Scriven  on  Copyhold.  See 
Scriv.  Cop.  122,  4th  edit.     See  tit.  "Office." 

[t)  Ante,  p.  150, 152.  R.  v.  Montacute  (Ld.),  1  W.  Blac.  60.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283. 
See  also  tits.  "  Custom,"  "  Presentment,"  infra,  "Admittance,"  "  Customary  License," 
"Surrended." 

(w)  Ante  p.  12,  13.  See  tit.  "  Discretion."  R.  v.  Dr.  Hale,  1  P.  &  D.  297.  S.  C. 
9  A.  &  E.  339,  342. f  See  Grove  v.  Bridges,  cited  by  Moreton,  J.,  in  Porphj-ry  v. 
Legingham,  2  Keb.  344.  S.  C.  cited,  in  Gilb.  Ten.  294.  Scriven  on  Copyhold,  456, 
4th  edit.     See  tits.  "  License." 

(v)  9  A.  &  E.  339.f     S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  293,  supra.     Scriv.  on  Cop.  456,  4th  edit. 


MANOR.  203 

merely,  that  licenses  had  frequently  been  granted  by  the  lord  on  payment 
of  a  sum  certain  for  each  acre,  the  writ  will  be  refused. (;/:)) 

.]     7th.   Admittance  ;  Jurisdiction  of  B.  R. — It  is  but  within  a 

recent  period,  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.,  first(ic)  granted  the  writ  of  manda- 
mus to  command  admission  to  a  customary  or  copyhold  tenement ;  before 
which  period,  any  person  who  wished  to  compel  his  admission  was,  as 
against  a  subject,  oblig;d  to  proceed  by  bill  in  equity,(3/)  and  as  against 
the  Crown,  the  remedy  was  as  it  now  is,  by  petition  of  right,  monstrans  de 
droit,  or  traverse  of  office,  according  to  the  nature  of  the  case.(z) 

The  writ  does  not  appear  to  have  been  granted  for  this  purpose  prior  to 
the  year  1772  or  1773  ;(a)  the  first  case  in  which  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Court  in  this  particular  is  clearly  recognised,  being  that  of  R.  v.  Ptennett,(i) 
in  which  (although  its  main  point  has  been  since  expressly  overruled),  the 
Court  held,  that  in  a  proper  case  they  would  command  the  lord  of  a  manor 
to  admit  a  copyholder  ;  it  having  been  previously  solemnly  determined,(c) 
that  a  mandamus  lay  to  command  the  homage  of  a  manor  to  present  certain 
conveyances  J  which  amounted  perhaps  to  the  same  thing  as  a  mandamus 
to  admit,  (rt') 

The  right  of  the  Court  of  B.  R.  to  thus  assume  a  jurisdiction,  and  to 
grant  the  writ  in  this  and  similar  cases,  has  been  much  questioned  in 
equity.(e)  But  Lord  Ellenborough,  C.  J.,  has  upon  this  point(/)  said, 
that  he  was  aware  that  the  power  of  his  Court  to  grant  a  mandamus 
to  admit  to  a  copyhold  had  been  questioned  on  the  other  side  of  the 
Hall,  yet  the  Court  having  for  many  years  past  being  in  the  habit  of  grant- 
ing such  writs  on  a  sufficient  prima  facie  or  colourable  title  being  made 
out,  on  the  part  of  the  person  applying ;  he  could  not  doubt  its  power  in 
that  respect. ((/)  Other  Judges  of  the  same  Court,  have  however,  often 
expressed  a  regret  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.  ever  interfered  in  these  cases,  (/t) 

{w)  Ante,  p.  105.  R.  v.  Dr.  Hale,  &c,  1  P.  &  D.  293.  S.  C.  9  A.  &  E.  339,f 
n.  (a) ;  the  period  of  time  during  which  the  licenses  had  been  granted  was  more 
than  a  century.  Scriven  on  Copyhold,  458,  n.  («),  532,  533,  4th  edit.  See  tit. 
"  Custom." 

(z)  A  regret  has,  however,  often  been  expressed  by  the  Judges,  that  the  Court 
has  ever  interfered  by  mandamus  in  cases  of  admission.     Infra,  n.  (A). 

{y)  Post,  p.  155,  n.  (k),  157,  n.  (t-)- 

(z)  See  tit.  "  Patent."  A  mandamus  does  not  lie  for  admission  to  a  tenement  with- 
in a  royal  manor,  4  P.  &  D.  723.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  352.1  S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  148,  Q. 
B.,  infra.  And  see  Scriven  on  Copyhold,  531,  and  n.,  4th  edit.  See  infra,  "Royal 
Manor." 

ia)  Anon.,  LofiFt,  390,  H.  14  Geo.  3. 

\b)  H.  28  Geo.  3 ;  2  T.  R.  197.     Anon.,  Lofift,  390. 

(c)  R.  T.  Midhurst  (Borough),  M.  24  Geo.  2,  1  Wils.  283.  S.  C,  1  W.  Blac.  60. 
See  ante,  p.  12,  and  tit.  "Corporation  Municipal"  (Duties,  &c.) 

{d  )  R.  V.  Pitt,  10  A.  &  E.  279.1  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  391.  See  tit.  "Presentment," 
and  supra,  p.  152,  n.  {I). 

(e)  3  Ves.  Jun.,  752,  4,  Williams  v.  Lord  Lonsdale.     See  ante,  p.  22. 

(/)  R.  V.  Coggan,  6  East,  431. 

[g)  Ree  d.  Conolly  v.  Vernon,  5  East,  51,  and  cited  6  East,  430,  n.  (a).  See  1 
Scriven  on  Copyholds,  525,  527,  4th  edit. 

(A)  Supra,  n.  (z). 


204  tapping's    mandamus. 

P^,  - .-.  *But  notwithstanding  all  that  has  been  said,  it  is  clear  that  the 
Court  of  15.  R.  has  jurisdiction  by  mandamus  in  cases  of  admis- 
sion, &c.,  and  will  now  on  a  proper  case  grant  the  writ  for  such  pur- 
pose,(i)  whether  the  applicant  claim  by  descent  or  by  purchase. — As  to 
admission  in  pursuance  of  a  surrender,  see  infra,  Surrender. 

.]      When  (/ranted. — Before  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  13.  R. 

as  to  admission,  &c.,  was  fully  devolved,  such  Court  always  refused  the 
writ  of  mandamus  for  the  purpose  of  commanding  the  admittance  of  those 
who  claim  by  descent  from  the  deceased  tenant, (/)  both  because  there  was 
a  remedy  in  cquity,(Z;)  and  also,  that  they  might  enter,  do  every  other 
act  before  admittance ;  and  in  fact,  had  a  complete  title  without  it  against 
all  the  world  but  the  lord.(/) 

During  later  years  however,  it  has  been  the  constant  habit  of  the  Court 
to  grant  the  writ  to  those  who  claim  by  descent ;  the  case  of  Rex  v. 
Rennett,(/)  which  decided  otherwise,  having  been  overruled  upon  this 
point.  The  reasons  upon  which  this  doctrine,  that  an  heir  at  laio  is  enti- 
tled to  a  writ  to  command  his  attendance  is  founded,  are,  that  although 
he  has  a  good  title  against  every  one,  but  the  lord,  yet  he  has  a  right  to 
insist  upon  admittance,  in  order  to  make  him  a  complete  copyholder,  for 
he  may  wish  to  be  put  upon  the  homage,  or  to  be  put  in  nomination  for 
various  offices,  or  to  surrender  to  the  use  of  his  will.(m)  Thus  copar- 
ceners, although  they  claim  by  descent,  are  entitled  to  have  granted  to 
them  a  writ  of  mandamus  to  command  their  admittance,  and  it  would 
seem  that  as  they,  however  many,  mabe  in  law  but  one  tenant  and  one 
heir,  they  must  be  admitted  upon  payment  of  one  set  of  fees  only.(??) 

The  Court  has  also  granted  a  mandamus  for  the  admission  of  an  heir, 

r*1  ^n  ^^'isre  the  ancestor  through  whom  the  heir   claimed  had  died 

before  admittance,  thus  deciding  the  principle  that  the  Court  will 

(i)  R.  V.  Oundle  (Mayor),  1  A.  &  E.  283.f  where  see  a  form  of  writ.  R.  v.  Ever- 
don  (Manor),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  18,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Hendon  (Manor),  2  T.  R.  484;  6  East, 
431 ;  3  B.  &  C.  1Y2  ;f  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.     See  post,  p.  156. 

(j)  R.  v.  Rennett,  2  T.  R.  197,  cited  in  R.  v.  Bonsall  (Manor),  3  B.  &  C.  iTS.f 
S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  82,1  and  in  R.  v.  Coggan,  6  East,  431.  R.  v.  Montacutc  (Ld.),  1 
W.  Blac.  64,  n.  (1) ;  1  Wils.  283.  S.  C.  3  Mod.  334,  n.  (e)  See  10  A.  &  E.  279,t 
per  Littledale,  J.  See  Scriven  on  Copyhold,  p.  527,  528,  4th  edit.  As  to  Fines 
see  infra,  p.  158. 

(Jc)  Ante,  p.  22;  2  T.  R.  198,  supra;  Litt.  66,  67.  Ford  v.  Hoskins,  Cro.  Jac. 
368 ;  1  Roll.  Abr.  108.     R.  v.  Pitt,  10  A.  &  E.  279,f  per  Littledale,  J. 

[l)  2  T.  R.  198,  supra.     R.  v.  Hendon  (Manor),  2  T.  R.  484. 

(m)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Brewers'  Company,  3  B.  &  C.  172,  l73.f  S.  C.  5  M.  & 
R.  140,  153.  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  492.f  R.  v.  Bonsall  (Manor),  3  B.  &  C.  173-1  S.  C. 
4  D.  &  R.  825,t  per  Abbott,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Wilson,  10  B.  &  C.  80,  87.t  S.  C.  5  M.  & 
Rv.  140,  where  see  form  of  writ.  See  Right  v.  Banks,  3  B.  &  Ad.  668.f  R:  v. 
Hexham  (Manor),  1  N.  &  P.  53.t  S.  C.  5  A.  &E.  5G2.t  Doe  d.  Hamilton  v.  Clift, 
12  A.  &  E.  575.1  R.  v.  Coggan,  6  East,  431,  432.  Doe  d.  LeKeux  v.  Harrison,  6  Q. 
B.  636.f  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  77,  Q.  B.  But  in  these  cases  the  dispute  was  not 
between  the  heir  and  a  mere  stranger,  but  with  the  lord.  R.  v.  Bonsall  (Mauor), 
3B.  &C.  I73.f     S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  825,t  per  Abbott,  C.  J.     See  post,  p.  159. 

(n)  R.  V.  Bonsall  (Manor),  3  B.  &  C.  173,  I75.t  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  825  :t  and  see 
Wilson  V.  Hoare,  4  A.  &  E.  239  ;t  1  M.  &  K.  456.  See  R.  v.  Everdon  (Manor),  16 
L.  J.,  N.  S.,  Q.  B.  18.  As  to  several  fines  of  tenants  in  common.  See  infra,  tit. 
"  Fines." 


MANOR. 


205 


command  the  lord  to  admit  ono  who  has  a  prima  facie  legal  title,  in  order 
to  enable  him  to  try  his  right;  and  though  equity  may  have  refused  to 
compel  tho  lord  to  admit  him  for  want  of  his  shewing  an  equitable  right 
to  the  property,  (as  where  the  heir  of  a  trustee  seeks  admittance  the  ces- 
tui que  trust  having  died  without  heirs,)  but  in  such  a  case,  if  there  be  a 
claim  of  a  previous  fine  due  to  the  lord  in  respect  of  the  ancestor,  through 
whom  the  party  claims,  the  rule  will  only  be  granted  on  payment  of  such 
fine  or  fines  as  shall  be  due.(o) 

But  if  an  heir  apply  to  the  Court  for  a  mandamus  to  admit,  &c.,  with 
a  view  to  try  his  title  to  a  copyhold  tenement,  as  against  a  stranger,  the 
Court  will  in  its  discretion  refuse  the  writ  for  such  purpose ;  for,  iti  rela- 
tion with  the  stranger  he  has  no  title  but  the  bare  admittance  and  the 
payment  of  the  fine  to  the  lord.(p) 

But  in  a  more  recent  case,  the  Court  on  the  application  of  the  heir,  who 
claimed  also  as  devisee,  granted  the  writ  although  he  claimed  adversely 
to  a  third  party,  the  Court  stating,  that  upon  principle  the  writ  ought  to 
go,  and  that  the  fact  that  there  are  two  claimants  by  diffcrant  titles  does 
not  operate  so  as  to  conclude  the  application  for  the  mandamus ;  for  the 
lord  should  and  must  admit  both.(g') 

The  aid  of  the  Court  of  B.  R.  in  favour  of  a  customary  heir  was  carried 
to  its  fullest  extent  in  a  case,  the  short  outline  of  which  is  this,  a  tenant 
in  fee  of  copyhold  tenements  surrendered  to  the  use  of  his  will,  and  devis- 
ed them  to  A.  for  life,  remainder  to  B.  for  life,  remainder  to  his  own 
right  heirs.  The  devisees  disclaimed,  and  it  was  held,  that  on  the  death 
of  the  testator,  the  estate  descended  to  his  heir,  and  that  as  the  devisees 
would  not  come  in  and  be  admitted,  he  was  entitled  to  admittance,  and 
that  whether  the  disclaimer  by  the  devisees  were  or  were  not  made  in 
furtherance  of  a  scheme  to  defeat  the  lord's  right  to  fines. (r) 

The  Court  will  also  grant  the  writ  to  command  the  admittance  of  a 
devisee,{s)  notwithstanding  the  heir  at  law  claim  adversely,  for  the  admit- 
tance is  no  title  of  itself,  nor  does  it  prejudice  an  adverse  title. (i) 

*So  the  writ  lies  to  command  an  admission  by  the  lord,  in  pur- 
suance   of  a  legal  surrender.     For  the  tenant  is  by  admittance  L 

(o)  Ante,  pp.  2T,  28.  R.  v.  Coggan,  6  East,  430;  2  T.  R.  197,  supra.  See 
Scriven  on  Copyhold,  408,  4th  edit. 

(jo)  Ante,  pp.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Brewers'  Company,  3  B.  &  C.  l72.f  S.  C.  5  M.  & 
R.  140,  133.  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  492.f  R.  v.  Bonsall  (Manor),  3  B.  &  C.  l73.t  S.  C. 
4  D.  &  R.  825,f  per  Abbott,  C.  J.     See  post,  tit.  "Application." 

[q)  See  ante,  72,  n.  (e),  post,  n.  [t).  R.  v.  Hexham  (Manor),  1  N.  &  P.  53.t  S. 
C.  5  A.  &  E.  559,1  and  see  Mason  v.  Day,  Gilbert's  Equity  Cases,  and  R.  v.  Wilson, 
10  B.  &  C.  80,t  and  see  3  B.  &  C.  I72.t  S.  C.  5  M.  &  R.  140,  153.  S.  C.  4  D.  & 
R.  492.f     See  supra;  and  see  Scriven  on  Copyhold,  525,  4th  edit. 

(r)  R.  v.  Wilson,  10  B.  &  C.  80.f  S.  C.  5  M.  &  Ry.  140,  153;  and  see  R.  v. 
Southwood,  5  M.  &  Ry.  416.     Scriven  on  Copyli.  528,  4th  edit. 

{s)  Anon  LotFt.  390.     R.  v.  Wilson,  10  B.  &  C.  80,  87-1     S.  C.  5  M.  &  Ry.  140. 

(t)  Supra,  n.  {q).  Anon.  Loft't,  390.  See  Coke's  Complete  Copyholder.  R.  v. 
Agarsdley,  5  D.  19.  R.  v.  Heiham  (Manor),  5  A.  &  E.  559.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  53.t 
R.  V.  Southwood,  5  M.  &  Ry.  416.  See  p.  72  (Lis  pendens).  And  see  post,  tits. 
"Application,"  "Peremptory  Writ"  (Effect). 


206  tapping's    mandamus. 

only,  according  to  the  quality  of  his  estate  in  his  true  right ;  and  the 
lord  through  his  steward  is  only  an  instrument  of  custom  to  convey  that 
right.  (») 

.]     .      Wien  refused. — The  Court  will  refuse  to  grant  the 

writ  to  command  an  admission  in  any  case  where  such  admission  is  un- 
necessary ;  0*  where  the  Court  of  Chancery  has  interfered,  and  is  compe- 
tent to  give  full  relief  ;(f)  or  where  the  prosecutor  may  bring  ejectment  and 
try  his  title  before  admission. (?<•)  Nor  will  the  Court  interfere  in  favour 
of  an  applicant  whose  claim  has  been  shewn  to  be  bad  by  his  acquiescence 
in  the  adverse  verdict  of  a  jury. (a;) 

Also,  as  the  title  of  the  prosecutor  to  admission  must  be  a  complete 
legal  one,  so  if  it  be  barred  by  the  Statute  of  Limitations,  3  &  4  Wm.  4, 
c.  27,  or  be  otherwise  defective,  the  court  will  refuse  to  assist  him  by 
granting  the  writ.(?/)  So  if  the  applicant  be  cestui  que  trust  merely,  the 
legal  estate  appearing  on  the  Court  rolls  to  be  in  the  trustees,  (z)  Nor  will 
the  Court  enforce  an  admittance,  if  felony  have  been  committed  by  the 
surrenderee  before  admittance,  for  thereby  the  estate  escheats  to  the 
lord,  (a) 

.]     .     Royal  Manor. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the 

admission  of  a  customary  tenant  of  a  royal  manor;  (notwithstanding  the 
steward  thereof  receive  his  appointment  from  the  Commissioners  of  Woods 
and  Forests,  under  stat.  10  Geo.  4,  c.  50,  s.  14,  for  such  statute  does  not 
devest  the  Crown  of  the  legal  estate)  •,(l>)  for  the  reason  that  the  Sovereign, 
as  lord  or  lady  of  the  manor,  is  not  subject  to  the  writ.(c).  That  this  is 
settled  law  cannot  be  doubted;  both  because  there  would  be  an  incongruity 
for  the  Sovereign  to  command  itself  to  do  an  act,  and  also,  that  obedience 
to  such  a  writ  is  to  be  enforced  by  attachment.     Therefore  notwithstand- 

(m)  Ante,  p.  12.  Anon.  Loft.  390.  R.  t.  Oundle  (Manor),  1  A.  &  E.  283.t  S. 
C.  3  N.  &  M.  484.f  R.  v.  Powell,  1  Q.  B.  355.t  R.  v.  Willis,  3  B.  &  A.  SlO.f  R. 
V.  Oundle  (Manor),  1  N.  &  M.  586.f  R.  v.  Hendon  (Manor),  2  T.  R.  484.  R.  v. 
Stafford  (Marquis  of),  Y  East,  521.  R.  v.  Mildmay,  5  B.  &  Ad.  254.t  S.  C.  2  N.  & 
M.  778.t  R.  V.  Bonsall  (Manor),  4D.  &R.  825.f  S.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  ITS.f  R.  v.  Mid- 
hurst  (Borough),  1  Wils.  283.  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Montacute  (Ld.),  1  W.  Blac.  60, 
and  see  p.  64,  n.  [I).   See  supra,  "Admittance,"  and  infra,  "Surrender," 

(f)  Ante,  pp.  15,  22.  R.  v.  Pitt,  10  A.  &  E.  272.t  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  285.  See 
infra. 

{w)  Ante,  p.  18—21  ;  5  D.  19,  supra,  citing  R.  v.  Rennett,  2  T.  R.  197,  which 
case,  it  was  insisted,  was  not  overruled  by  R.  v.  Brewers'  Company,  3  B.  &  C.  172, f 
according  to  the  report  of  that  case  in  4  D.  .&  R.  492  ,f  but  see  ante,  p.  155,  n.  [l). 

(x)  Ante  pp.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Argarsdley  (Manor),  5  D.  20,  citing  R.  v.  Bonsall,  3 
B.  &  C.  173. f  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  825  ;f  and  see  Widdowson  v.  Harrington,  1  Jac.  & 
Walk.  542,  and  note  to  1  Watk.  Copyh.,  4th  edit.  297. 

[y)  Ante,  pp.  27,  28.  Ex  parte  Philips,  1  H.&  W.  660.  R.v.  Agarsdley(Manor), 
5  D.  19. 

(z)  Ante  pp.  27,  28  ;  Selw.  N.  P.  "  Man."  1102.     See  tit.  "  Equitable  Right." 

(d)  Ante,  pp.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Mildmay,  5  B.  &  Ad.  254,f  S.  C.  2  N.  &  M.  778  ;t 
and  see  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

{b)  Ante,  p.  154,  n.  (z).  R.  v.  Powell,  4  P.  &  D.  719.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  352.1  S.  C. 
10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  148,  Q.  B.     See  tits.  "  Crown,"  "Customs,"  "  King,"  "  Queen." 

(c)  See  "Application,"  "Rule,"  infra,  and  see  tits.  "  Crown,"  "  Customs."  See 
post,  tit.  "  Application." 


MANOR.  '  207 

ing  *proceedings  by  mandamus  are  according  to  the  general  course  .  _ 
of  practice,  yet,  as  sucli  a  writ  for  admission  to  a  tenement  parcel  L  -' 
of  a  royal  manor  cannot  be  granted,  except  against  both  the  Sovereign  and 
the  steward,  so  it  cannot  go  against  the  steward  alone,(f/)  for  the  reason  that 
the  interests  of  the  lord  ought  to  be  protected ;  it  is  not  because  the  manor 
happens  to  be  a  royal  onC;  that  the  Crown  is  to  be  excluded  from  the  benefit 
of  that  protection,  for  its  interests  are  to  be  as  much  guarded  as  those  ot  a 
subject :  and  that  whether  the  Sovereign  take  the  profits  of  the  manor  to  his 
own  use,  or  whether  they  be  appropriated  to  the  public  service,  as  they 
now  are  by  stat.  10  Geo.  4,  c.  50. (e) 

.]     .     Fines. — If  the  lord  refuse  to  admit  the  person  to  whom 

a  copyhold  is  surrendered,  on  account  of  a  disagreement  respecting  the 
fine  to  be  paid,  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  to  command  him  to  ad- 
mit without  examining  the  right  to  the  fine,  for  no  right  to  it  can  arise  till 
admittance.(/)  But  if  there  be  a  claim  of  a  previous  fine  due  in  respect 
of  the  ancestor,  through  whom  the  prosecutor  claims,  the  rule  in  such  case 
will  only  be  granted  on  payment  of  such  fine  or  fines  as  shall  be  due.(  g) 

.     Application  for  Writ  ;  Affidavits — The  application  for  a  writ 

to  command  admission,  &c.,  should  be  supported  by  affidavits  setting  out 
the  pedigree  of  the  prosecutor,  if  necessary  ;  at  all  events,  his  title  to  the 
lands,  &c.  to  which  admission  is  sought,  must  be  indefeasible  andgood,(A) 
and  should  appear  on  affidavit.  Such  application  must  be  made  against 
both  the  lord  of  the  manor  and  the  steward,  and  not  against  the  latter 
only.(0 

.     R\de. — The  lord  must,  as  well  as  the  steward,  be  made  a  party 

to  the  rule.(y  ) 

.  Form  of  Writ ;  Direction. — A  mandamus  to  admit  to  a  copy- 
hold tenement  must  not  be  directed  to  the  steward  alone,  the  lord  must  be 
joined  with  him,  and  if  not,  the  writ  will  be  defective  in  substance  ;(7iO  it 
must  therefore,  be  directed  to  the  lord  and  steward  jointly,  for  thereby  the 

(d)  R.  T.  Whitford,  1  D.  709.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  355  ;t  and  see  4  P.  &  D.  721.  S.  C. 
1  Q.  B.  352,t  supra  ;  and  see  R.  v.  Oundle  (Manor),  1  A.  &  E.  283  ;t  3  N.  &  M.  484  ;t 
1  N.  &  M.  586. f  See  Rogers  v.  Jones,  5  D.  &  R.  484  ;f  where  the  writ  was  to  in- 
spect the  rolls  merely. 

(e)  4  P.  &  D.  721.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  352,1  supra,  p.  157,  n.  (6),  (c). 

(/)  R.  V.  Hendon  (Manor),  2  T.  R.  484.  R.  v.  Montacute  (Ld.),  1  W.  Blac.  64, 
n.  [l).  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.  Dow.  v.  Golding,  Cro.  Car.  196.  As  to  fines  of  coparce- 
ners, see  supra;  as  to  those  of  surrenderees,  see  infra,  p.  160. 

(g)  Ante,  p.  155,  156.     R.  v.  Coggan,  6  East,  431.     See  post,  p.  161,  n.  (b). 

(h)  5  D.  19,  and  see  ante,  p.  27,  28,  157.     See  post,  tit.  "Application." 

(t)  R.  T.  Powell,  4  P.  &  D.  722.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  352.f  See  ante,  p.  158.  Scriven 
on  Copj'h.  531,  4th  edit.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

(/)  Ante,  p.  158.  R.  v.  Whitford  (Manor),  1  Q.  B.  355.t  S.  C.  7  D.  709,  and 
cases  there  cited.     See  post,  tit.  "  Rule." 

\k)  Ante,  p.  158.  R.  v.  Powell,  4  P.  &  D.  719,  721.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  352.1  R.  v. 
Whitford,  7  Dowl.  709.  R.  v.  Coggan,  6  East,  431.  Harris  v.  Jay,  4  Rep.  30  a. 
There  are,  however,  some  cases  to  the  contrary,  but  the  objection  was  either  not 
raised,  or  was  waived.  Holroyd  v.  Beare,  2  B.  &  A.  473,  550.  R.  v.  Rennett,  2  T. 
R.  197.     See  tit.  "  Writ"  (Direction). 


208  tapping's    mandamus. 

interests  of  the  Ln-d  arc  more  eiTcctually  protected. (^)  Nor  will  the  writ  be 
r*l  f;m  *g'"'"ited  to  command  tlie  steward  of  a  manor  to  accept  a  .surren- 
dcr  into  the  hands  of  the  lord  according  to  custom,  unless  the  lord 
be  made  a  party  to  the  rulc.(«()  The  above  rule  is  not  limited  to  cases 
where  the  lord  of  a  manor  is  a  subject,  but  also,  for  the  reason  above 
given,  to  cases  where  the  manor  is  a  royal  one,  although  there  can  be  no 
mandamus  to  the  Sovereign. (7t) 

.]  Returns. — The  return  to  a  writ  of  mandamus  for  the  admis- 
sion of  an  heir  must  deny  (if  it  be  intended  to  rest  the  defence  upon  that 
ground)  the  fact  that  the  prosecutor  is  heir;  for  if  it  do  not  do  so  ex- 
pressly, but  only  argumentatively,  it  will  be  bad  for  uncertainty, (o)  and 
a  peremptory  writ  will  be  awarded.  The  defendant  may  also  traverse  all 
or  any  of  the  suggestions  of  the  wi'it. 

.]     8th.   Surrender. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  the  lord  and 

steward  of  a  manor  to  hold  a  Court  and  receive  certain  customary  sur- 
renders,(j))  either  of  the  whole  or  of  a  portion  of  the  copyhold  lands,  or 
of  a  portion  or  of  the  whole  of  a  tenant's  interest.(g')  But  the  surrenders 
should  be  accurately  prepared,  and  such  as  the  steward  is  bound  to  re- 
ceive,(/•)  otherwise  the  Court  will  not  interfere;  neither  will  it  interfere 
if  the  case  be  properly  the  subject  of  litigation  in  Chancery. (.s) 

The  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  the  lord,  &c.  to  receive  and 
examine  a  surrender  of  a  copyhold  tenement  within  his  manor,  which  it 
is  his  duty  to  receive  and  examine  according  to  a  special  custom. (<)  But 
the  Court  will  not  command  the  lord,  &c.  to  accept  a  surrender  of  certain 
customary  or  copyhold  tenements  from  his  tenant,  for  the  purpose  of 
carrying  into  effect  the  provisions  of  stat.  11  Geo.  4  and  1  Wra.  4,  c.  60, 
s.  8,  for  the  Court  of  Chancery  can  compel  the  performance  of  whatever 
may  be  requisite,  and  in  such  a  case  is  better  able  than  the  Court  of  B. 
R.  to  regulate  the  rights  of  the  parties,  (m)     And  as  the  Court  of  Chan- 

{l)  R.  V.  Evans,  1  Q.  R.  352.f  R.  v.  Midhurst,  supra,  is  an  early  instance  of  a 
mandamus  to  the  lord,  "  or  liis  steward." 

(m)  R.  V.  Evans,  1  Q.  B.  355,t  n.,  1  A.  &  E.  283.f  2  T.  R.  484.  R.  v.  Whitford 
(Manor),  7  D.  709.     Supra,  p.  158,  n.  {d). 

[n)  Ante,  p.  157,  158  ;  4  P.  &  D.  721.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  3Gl.f 

[o]  4  D.  &  R.  492.t  S.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  172,  I73.t  S.  C.  5  M.  &  R.  140,  153.  R. 
V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  Doug.  182.  See  post,  tit.  "Return"  (Traverse,  Confession 
and  Avoidance.) 

(;?)  Ante,  p.  158.  R.  v.  Bough ey,  1  B.  &  C.  5G5.f  Snook  v.  Mattock,  5  A.  &  E. 
239.f  R.  v.  Whitfield  (Manor),  7  D.  709.  R.  v.  Bishop's  Stoke  (Manor),  8  D. 
G08.  R.  V.  Pitt,  10  A.  &  E.  272.t  S.  0.  2  P.  &  D.  385.  Snag  v.  Fox,  Palm.  342. 
Scriven  on  Copyhold,  525,  527,  530,  4th  edit.  See  1  P.  &  D.  172.  S.  C.  8  A.  & 
E.  858, f  where  sec  form  of  writ.  See  tit.  "Corporation  Municipal"  (Duties,' &c.), 
"Court  Inferior"  (Holding). 

(7)  Snag  V.  Fox,  Palm.  342.     Scriv.  on  Copyh.  525,  4th  edit. 

[r]  See  ante,  pp.  27,  28;  8  D.  608,  supra.  Scriven  on  Copyhold,  523,  4th  edit. 
See  post,  tit.  "Application." 

(«)  Ante,  pp.  22,  23  ;   10  A.  &  E.  272.f     S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  285,  infra. 

{t)  R.  V.  Rigge,  2  B.  &  A.  550.  Scriven  on  Copyhold,  531,  4th  edit.  See  tit. 
"  (histom." 

{}i)  Ante,  pp.  22,  23.  R.v.  Pitt,  10  A.  k  E.  272.f  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  285.  Scriven 
on  Copyhold,  526  n.,  4th  edit.     See  supra. 


MANOR.  209 

eery  is  an  original  jurisdiction  as  to  surrenders,  admittances,  &c.,  the 
Court  of  B.  R.  will  not,  in  any  case,  intrude  its  jurisdiction  into  a  case 
where  the  Court  of  Chancery  has  previously  acted,  and  has  power  to  go 
on. 

*Tlic  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  lord  of  a  manor  to  receive  r*-|pA-i 
and  enrol  a  surrender  of  a  copyhold  tenement,  parcel,  &c.  of  the 
manor.(t')  But  not  without  payment  of  all  fines  due.  Thus  where  a 
devisee  for  life  on  admittance  paid  a  full  fine,  as  on  an  admittance  in  fee, 
and  the  heir  of  the  devisor  surrendered  his  reversion,  it  was  held  that  the 
surrenderee  could  not  compel  the  lord  to  enrol  the  surrender  without  pay- 
ment of  the  fine  payable  in  respect  of  the  descent  upon  the  heir. (to) 

The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  lord,  &c.  to  enter  upon  the  Court 
rolls  a  certain  deed  of  disposition  made  pursuant  to  stat.  3  &  4  Wm.  4,  c. 
74,  s.  53,  and  in  support  of  the  application,  it  is  not  necessary  to  annex 
a  copy  of  the  deed  itself  to,  if  the  contents  be  stated  in,  the  affidavit,  (.x) 
But  as  such  statute  applies  only  to  the  equitable  estates  of  tenants  in  tail 
of  lands  held  by  copy  of  Court  roll,  the  Court  has  refused  a  mandamus 
to  command  the  lord,  &c.  of  a  manor  to  enter  on  the  Court  rolls  an  inden- 
ture touching  certain  customary  freehold  hereditaments,  although  it  ap- 
peared that  the  steward  of  the  manor  was  accustomed  to  give  admittance, 
signed  by  him,  to  grantees  of  such  hereditaments,  but  not  to  enrol  the 
deeds  by  which  they  were  granted. (y) 

The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  lord  and  steward  of  a  manor  to  admit 
one  as  tenant  to  a  copyhold  tenement,  and  to  accept  from  him  a  surrender 
to  the  use  of  another  according  to  the  custom  of  the  manor,  to  secure  a 
sum  of  money  and  interest  by  way  of  mortgage.  (2) 

The  writ  also  lies  to  command  the  lord,  &c.  to  hold  a  customary  Court, 
and  thereat  to  receive  a  surrender  and  grant  an  admittance  according  to 
manorial  custom. (a)  Thus  where  by  the  custom  of  a  manor,  ail  persons 
not  being  previously  customary  tenants,  or  not  dwelling  in  the  manor,  who 
purchased  by  surrender  any  of  its  customary  lands,  became  liable  to  pay 
a  larger  fine  to  the  lord  than  such  tenants  or  inhabitants.  The  prosecu- 
tor, not  being  a  tenant  nor  an  inhabitant,  purchased  an  equity  of  redemp- 
tion in  a  customary  estate,  and  in  order  to  save  the  larger  fine  due  in 

(y)  R.  V.  Dullingham  (Manor),  1  P.  &  D.  1^2.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  858,t  where  see 
a  form  of  writ,  &c..  Moor.  465. 

(iv)  Ante,  p.  155,  156  ;  1  P.  &  D.  172.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  858,t  supra;  but  see 
Doe  d.  Winder  v.  Lawes,  2  N.  &  P.  195.  Scriv.  on  Copyh.  531,  and  n.  As  to  fines 
on  admittance,  see  supra,  p.  158. 

(x)  Crosby  v.  Fortescue,  5  D.  273.     S.  P.  R.  v.  Lynn,  2  Har.  &  W.  314. 

Uj)  Ante,  pp.  27,  28.     R.  v.  Ingleton  (Manor),  8  D.  693. 

(z)  R.  V.  Brewers'  Company,  4  D.  &  R.  492.f     S.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  172,  HS.f     S.  C. 

5  M.  &  R.  140,  153.  R.  v.  Mildmay,  5  B.  &  Ad.  254.t  S.  C.  2  N.  &  M.  778.t  See 
tits.  "Corporation  Municipal"  (Duties),  "  Courts,  Inferior, '  "Custom." 

[a)  Ante,  p.  159,  n.  (?«)•  R-  v.  Boughey,  1  B.  &  C.  565.t  S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  824.1 
R.  V.  Powell,  1  Q.  B.  352.f     S.  C.  4  P.  &.  D.  719.     R.  v.  Hexham  (Manor),  5  A. 

6  E.  559.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  53  ;f  and  see  Scriven  on  Copyhold,  525,  4th  edit. 
See  supra,  "  Constable"  (Appointment),  "  Corporation  Municipal"  (Duties,  &c.), 
"Courts,  Inferior"  (Holding),  "Custom." 

May,  1852.— 14 


210  tapping's    mandamus. 

respect  thereof,  subsequently  became  the  bona  fide  purchaser  of  a  smaller 
estate :  the  Court  granted  a  peremptory  mandamus  to  command  the  lord 
r*ipn  ^iiJ  steward  to  admit  *to  the  latter,  although  the  effect  of  admit- 
tance  to  the  smaller  estate  was  to  defeat  the  lord's  claim  to  the 
fine  due  upon  the  larger  estate  first  purchased ;  because  the  prosecutor 
might  lawfully  make  such  second  purchase,  in  order  to  avail  himself  of  the 
custom  in  favour  of  tenants  of  the  manor,  (t) 

.]     Application  for  Writ. — As  to  application  for  writ,  see  supra, 

Admittance,  p.  158,  and  post,  tit.  Application. 

.]     Rule. — As  to  rule,  see  ante,  p.  158,  and  post,  tit.  Rule. 

.]     Form  of  Writ. — As  to  form  of  writ,  see  ante,  p.  158,  and 

post,  tit.   Writ  (Form). 

.]  Returns. — As  to  retufns,  see  ante,  p.  159,  and  post,  tit.  Re- 
turn. 

.]     9th.    Court  Rolls,  &c.,  Delivery. — The  Court  of  B.   R.   will 

grant  the  writ  to  command  the  steward  of  a  manor  to  hand  over  to  the 
lord  all  Court  rolls,  &c.  improperly  detained;  but  if  the  steward  be  an 
attorney,  the  writ  will  be  refused,  for  its  object  can  be  sooner  and  better 
obtained  by  a  summary  application  to  the  Court  for  an  ordinary  rule  for 
such  purpose. (c) 

.]     Inspection,  &c. — The  Court  of  B.   R.  will,  after  a  previous 

demand  and  refusal,  interfere  by  mandamus,  and  command  a  lord  of  a 
manor  to  grant  inspection  and  copy  of  the  Court  rolls  of  his  manor  to  a 
tenant,  or  to  one  prima  facie  entitled,  although  his  own  title  may,  in  some 
degree,  be  in  question,(rf)  and  this  though  no  cause  be  depending. (e)  For 
it  is  only  when  no  action  is  depending,  that  the  motion  is  for  a  man- 
damus;(/)  otherwise  the  remedy  is  by  rule  of  Court. 

Every  copyholder  has  an  interest  in  the  rolls,  and  the  lord  ought  to 
grant  inspection  at  all  seasonable  times,  upon  request ;(f/)  and  the  tenant 
has  such  right  of  inspection  for  any  matter  that  concerns  himself,  though 
in  a  dispute  with  others,  (/t)  But  the  application  must,  in  every  case  be, 
and  the  mandamus  always  is,  limited  by  some  legitimate  and  particular 
object,  in  which  the  applicant  has  such  interest. (i) 

(b)  Ante,  pp.  27,  28  ;  2  D.  &  R.  824.f    S.  C.  1  B.  &  C.  565,f  supra,  p.  160,  n.  (a). 

(c)  Ante,  p.  45.  Cocks  v.  Harman,  6  East,  404.  In  re  Lowe,  8  East,  238. 
Hughes  V.  Mayre,  3  T.  R.  275  ;  and  see  6  Sim.  476  ;  4  B.  &  A.  48.  See  tits.  "  At- 
torney" (Rolls),  "  Books,"  "  Court"  (Inferior),  "  Borough,"  "Corporation"  (Muni- 
cipal). 

(d)  Supra,  n.  (a),  and  post,  tit.  "Application."  Finch  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  8  B.  &  C. 
I12.t  S.  C.  2  M.  &  R.  128,  n.  (a),  per  Bayley,  J. ;  and  see  R.  v.  Shelly,  3  T.  R. 
142,  per  BuUer,  J.,  and  the  many  cases  there  cited;  also  Ex  parte  Hutt,  7  D.  090. 
Ex  parte  Barnes,  2  D.,  N.  S.  20 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Evidence."  Roe  v.  Aylman, 
Barnes,  321,  236,  237.     R.  v.  Lucas,  10  East,  235  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  ".Man."  (D.) 

(e)  See  post,  162,  n.  [j).     Scriven  on  Copyh.  532,  4th  edit. 

(/)  Stra.  1223,  notis.  Tidd's  Prac.  649,  n.  [h).  Scriven  on  Copyh.  532,  n.  [h), 
4th  edit. 

(g)  Lovev.  Dr.  Bentley,  11  Mod.  134, per  Holt,  C.  J.;  2  B.  &  Ad.  125,  128,  130  ;t 
4  M.  &  S.  162,  infra.     See  tit.  "  Livings." 

(A)  R.  V.  Merchant  Tailors,  2  B.  &  Ad.  125.t     R.  v.  Tower,  4  M.  &  S.  162. 

(i)  2  B.  &  Ad.  125,f  and  4  M.  &  S.  162,  supra;  10  East,  235. 


MANOR. 


211 


The  cases  upon  this  subject  arc  difficult  of  arrancromont,  owing  to  the 
nice  distinctions  by  which  they  are  distinguished.  Although  some  of  the 
cases  appear  to  be  at  variance,  yet  it  seems  to  be  now  clearly  settled,  that 
the  Court  will  command  the  lord  to  allow  his  tenant  to  inspect  the  Court 
rolls,  as  to  the  *existcnce  of  a  particular  custom,  after  application  p)-.iQ2'\ 
and  refusal,  and  this  though  no  action  be  depending.  Thus  where 
a  copyholder  was  forbidden  by  the  lord  to  cut  underwood  upon  the  copy- 
hold without  the  lord's  license,  the  Court,  after  application  to,  and  refusal 
by  the  lord,  granted  a  mandamus,  and  commanded  him  to  permit  the 
tenant  to  inspect  the  Court  rolls,  so  far  as  related  to  the  cutting  of  such 
underwood;  and  held  that  he,  as  the  trustee  and  guardian  of  the  tenant's 
rights,  could  not  lock  up  the  evidence  of  them  from  him,  especially  in  a 
matter  where  his  own  interest  was  concerned,  notwithstanding  no  suit  was 
pending ;  for  if  it  were  otherwise,  the  tenant  would  be  obliged  to  com- 
mence an  action  blindfold,  with  an  uncertainty  of  what  his  rights  might 

The  writ  will  also  be  granted  to  allow  one  who  has  a  prima  facie  title  to 
a  copyhold  tenement,  to  inspect  and  take  copies  of  the  Court  rolls,  quoad 
the  copyhold  claimed,  or  in  which  he  may  be  interested  only,  though  no 
cause  be  depending  as  to  it  at  the  time,  and  the  Court,  on  granting  the 
rule,  said,  "  this  is  not  the  impertinent  intrusion  of  a  stranger,  but  the 
application  of  one  who  is  clearly  entitled  to  the  copyhold  ;  unless  there  be 
some  conveyance  of  it,  by  those  under  whom  he  claims ;  he  may,  there- 
fore, well  require  to  see  whether  there  appears  upon  the  rolls  to  be  any 
such  conveyance." (^-)  Also  where  the  devisee  of  a  rent-charge  on  certain 
copyholds  was  desirous  of  completing  his  title,  the  Court  granted  a  rule 
for  the  usual  limited  inspection  of  the  rolls,  although  the  applicant  was 
not,  in  fact,  a  copyholdor.(?)  So  a  rule  has  been  granted  for  inspection 
of  the  court  rolls  relating  to  the  defendant's  title,  in  an  action  by  one 
copyholder  against  another,  for  encroachment  on  the  wastes  of  the  manor 
over  which  they  claimed  a  right  of  common, (»r)  and  under  similar  cir- 
cumstances, it  has  been  granted  at  the  instance  of  freehold  tenants,  and 
this  although  the  cause  was  not  at  issue. («) 

The  privilege  of  thus  inspecting,  &c.  the  Court  rolls  and  books  of  a 
manor,  appears,  however,  to  be  confined  to  the  tenants  of  a  manor;  for  in 
a  question  between  a  lord  and  a  stranger,  leave  to  inspect  the  Court  rolls 
has  been  refused. (o)     It  has  been  also  expressly  decided,  that  although 

(/)  Sec  supra,  "Custom."  R.  v.  Tower,  4  M.  &  S.  162,  cited  in  2  M.  &  Ry.  128.1 
S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  112,f  supra.  Ex  parte  Best,  3  D.  38.  R.  v.  Lucas,  10  East,  235, 
but  see  R.  v.  Allgood,  T  T.  R.  740 ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.) 

(k)  10  East,  235  ;  2  M.  &  Ry.  128.  S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  112  jf  2  B.  &  Ad.  123,  129  ;f 
4  M.  &  S.  1G2 ;  2  D.,  N.  S.  21,  supra.     See  Scriven  on  Copyh.  532,  4th  edit. 

(l)  2  D.,  N.  S.  20,  supra,  n.  [k). 

(m)  Folkard  v.  Ilemet,  2  W.  Blac.  1061 ;  and  see  2  M.  &  Ry.  128.  S.  C.  8  B.  & 
C.  112.f     2  W.  Blac.  1029,  supra,  n.  [k). 

(n)  Rogers  v.  Jones,  5  D.  &  R.  484.     See  post,  p.  163,  n.  (s). 

(o)  Talbot  v.  Villebois,  M.  23  Geo.  B.  R.  Tidd,  9th  edit.  594,  cited  also  in  3  T.  R. 
142,  supra.    And  see  2  M.  &  Ry.  128.     S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  112,t  supra,  n.  (y). 


212  TAP  ting's    mandamus. 

such  leave  to  inspect,  &c.,  -will  be  granted  of  course,  on  the  application  of 
a  tenant  who  has  hoen  refused  that  permission  ;(p)  yet  that  where  there 
is  not  that  relation,  *thero  must  be  a  cause  or  suit  instituted, 
t  J  or  some  urgent  necessity,  or  specific  ground  shown ;  as  that  the 
"ranting  it  is  necessary  to  prevent  injury,  or  to  enable  a  performance  of 
duties.  (</) 

The  Court  has  also  refused  a  mandamus  to  permit  inspection,  &c.,  by 
the  prosecutor  of  an  indictment  (even  though  he  was  a  tenant  of  the 
manor),  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  evidence  to  support  such  indictment 
against  the  lord,  the  Court  saying,  "  that  though  it  might,  in  substance, 
be  a  civil  proceeding,  yet,  in  form,  it  was  criminal,  and  therefore  they 
could  not  compel  the  defendant  to  furnish  evidence  against  himsclf."('') 

It  has  also  been  held  that  a  freeholder  within  a  manor  may  claim  the 
interference  of  the  court  of  B.  R.,  by  mandamus,  to  obtain  inspection,  &c., 
of  the  Court  rolls,  &c.,  although  the  question  depending  be  as  to  a  right 
to  common. (s)  But  in  an  action  between  the  freeholder  of  a  manor  and 
the  lord,  touching  a  copyhold,  the  Court  refused  a  rule  to  inspect,  &c.,  on 
the  ground  that  the  plaintiff  was  not  obliged  to  assist  the  defendant  to  make 
out  his  title. (0  Also  freehold  tenants  have  no  right  to  inspect  the  Court 
rolls,  unless  some  cause  be  depending  in  which  their  right  may  be  involv- 
ed.(w)  So  no  stranger  to  privity  of  estate  has  a  right  to  inspect,(i)  &c., 
the  Court  rolls  of  a  manor. 

.     Application. — The  lord  of  a  manor  is,  as  before  stated,  bound 

to  grant  his  tenants  inspection,  &c.  of  the  Court  rolls  at  all  seasonable 
times,  upon  request ;  so  that  the  tenant  must  demand,  and  the  lord  refuse 
such  inspection,  before  the  Court  is  applied  to  for  its  interference  ;  but  any 
tenant  whether  jointly  or  severally  interested,  is  entitled  to,  and  may  de- 
mand, inspection  alone,  without  the  concurrence  of  the  others.  Such  de- 
mand must  be  made  personally,  or  by  agent,  and  cannot  be  made  by  the 
agent  of  a  person  authorized,  by  power  of  attorney,  to  make  such  demand 
on  behalf  of  the  tenant,  although  the  agent's  authority  be  in  writing.(K;) 
The  demand  should  also  be  limited  to  some  legitimate  and  particular  object 

(  p]  3  T.  R.  141,  supra.  Wood  \.  "Whitcomb,  E.  6  Anne,  C.  B.,  12  Vin.  146,  and 
see  2  M.  &  Rv.  128.     S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  112,t  supra.     See  post,  p.  163,  164. 

{q\  2  B.  &"Ad.  125,  128,  130,t  and  4  M.  &  S.  162,  supra,  n.  {k). 

(r)  R.  V.  Cadogan  (Lord),  1  D.  &R.  559.t  S.  C.  5  B.  &  A.  902 ;  2  M.  &Ry.  128. 
S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  112,f  supra.     Smith  v.  Davies,  1  Wils.  104.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 

is)  Ante,  p.  162.  Addington  v.  Clode,  2  W.  Blac.  1030 ;  also  cited  in  2  M.  &  R. 
128.  S.  c'  8  B.  &  C.  112,f  supra.  See  Hobson  v.  Parker,  Barnes,  237,  andRogers 
V.  Jones,  5  D.  &  R.  484,f  accor.  Smith  v.  Davies,  1  Wils.  104,  cont.  Scriv.  on  Copyh. 
532,  n.,  4th  edit.  „   ^ , 

(/)  Smith  V.  Davies,  1  Wils.  104,  cited  in  2  M.  &  Ry.  128.     S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  112,t 

^"yw^R  V  Allgood,  T  T.  R.  "746.  Smith  v.  Davies,  1  Wils.  104.  R.  v.  Merchant 
Tailors,  2  13.  &  Ad.  llS.f     But  see  5  M.  k  Ry.  128.     S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  112.t 

Iv)   12  Vin.  Abr.  146.     Crew  v.  Saunders,  Stra.  1005. 

(J)  Ex  parte  Hutt,  1  D.  690.  Sec  1  Reg.  Gen.,  H.  T.,  2  Wm.  4,  s.  102  ;  1  D.  197. 
See  post,  tit.  "  Application"  (Demand  and  Refusal). 


MARCHES.  213^ 

in  which  the  applicant  has  an  interest,  (x)  It  seems  that  the  demand  may  be 
to,  and  the  application  to  the  Court  be,  against  the  steward  alone,  because 
the  lord,  it  *is  said,  has  no  interest  in  such  a  question  ;(y)but  is  ap-  r;^|p  <-i 
prehcnded,  that  the  prudent  course  is  to  make  also  the  lord  aparty.(::r)  ^ 

.     Rule. — The  practice  seems  to  have  formerly  been,  that  if  the 

rule  were  moved  for  on  behalf  of  a  copyhold  tenant,  it  was  absolute  in  the 
first  instance,(a)  and  now  by  1  Reg.  Gen.,  H.,  2  Wm.  4,  s.  102,  it  is 
ordered  that  "  an  order  upon  the  lord  of  a  manor,  to  allow  the  usual  limit- 
ed inspection  of  the  Court  rolls,  on  the  application  of  a  copyhold  tenant, 
may  be  absolute  in  the  first  instance,  upon  an  affidavit  that  the  applicant 
has  applied  for  and  has  been  refused  inspection. (Z^).  But  this  rule  has 
been  held  to  be  applicable  only  to  cases  in  which  an  action  is  pending,  and 
not  to  an  ex  parte  application,  in  which  latter  case,  the  rule  is  nisi  only  in 
the  first  instance. (c.) 

Manor  Courts.]     See  titles   Courts  Inferior ;  Manor  {Leet,  Baron). 

Marches.]  Clerh  of  Fines  in  ;  Election. — The  writ  lies  to  admit  one 
elected  Clerk  of  the  Fines  in  the  Marches  of  Wales,  although  it  was  at 
first  denied,  because  it  did  not  then  appear  what  the  office  was.((i) 

.]     Deputy  Secretary  ;  Admission. — The  writ  lies  also  to  command 

the  lord  president  and  council  of  the  marches  to  admit  to  the  exercise  of 
the  office  of  Deputy  Secretary  of  the  Courts  of  the  Marches,  (e)  For  al- 
though a  mandamus  does  not  lie  for  a  deputy,  yet  it  lies  for  him  who  de- 
putes either  to  have  the  deputy  admitted  or  restored ;  for  otherwise  such 
principal  may  be  deprived  of  his  power  to  make  a  deputy. (/) 

.]     .     Restoration. — The  writ  lies  to  restore  a  deputy ;  and 

on  such  a  mandamus  to  restore  the  Deputy  Secretary  of  the  Courts  of 
Marches,  it  was  held  to  be  no  good  return,  that  at  the  time  of  the  writ 
delivered,  he  was  not  constituted  deputy;  because  of  the  uncertainty  as  to 
whether  he  had  not  been  put  out  of  his  place  before  the  writ  came  to  the 
defendants.  (^) 

(x)  R.  V.  Merchant  Tailors'  Company,  2  B.  &  Ad.  124,  125,f  per  Tenterden,  C.  J.  ; 
4  M  &  S.  162,  supra.     See  post,  tit.  "Application"  (Demand  and  Refusal). 

{y)  Rogers  v.  Jones,  5  D.  &  R.  484,t  R.  v.  Whitford  (Manor),  7  D.  711,  per  Lord 
Denman,  C.  J.     See  ante,  p.  158. 

(z)  R.  V.  Powell,  1  Q.  B.  SSS.f     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  722.  See  ante  p.  158. 

(«)  R.  V.  Shelley,  3  T.  R.  142,  per  BuUer,  J.;  2  W.  Blac.  1029,  1030,  n.  {u).  See 
post  tits.  "  Application,"  "  Rule." 

(b)  3  B.  &  Ad.  389  ;t  1  D.  197.     See  1  Q.  B.  355,t  n.  R.  v.  Evans. 

(c)  Ex  parte  Best,  3  D.  39,  per  Littledale,  J.  But  see  Ex  parte  Hutt,  7  D.  690, 
and  Ex  parte  Barnes,  2  D.,  N.  S.  29,  where,  the  rules  were  granted  absolute  in  the 
■fir^t  in stiUCC 

(d)  Dolben's  case,  1  Keb.  872,  881,  the  Court  perusingthe  precedents  in  Dr.  God- 
dard's  case,  Townsend's  case,  and  Latch.  123.  See  tits.  "  Ashburton"  (Eight  men 
of,)  "  Office." 

ie)  R.  T.  Clapham,  1  Vent.  110.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  738,  442.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  30G,  nom. 
R.  V.  Marches  (President).  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A).  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C. 
See  tit.  "  Deputy  Officer." 

( /•)  See  notc(6),  and  R.  v.  Roberts,  3  A.  &  E.  776.t  And  see  tit.  "  Office"  (Deputy). 

(g)  1  Lev.  306.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  738,  742.  S.  C.  Vent.  110,  supra.  See  tit.  "  Office" 
(Restoration),  and  post,  tit.  "  Returns"  (Certainty). 


214  tapping's    mandamus. 

Marriages,  Registrar  of.]     Sec  tit.  Registrar  of  Births,  &c. 

^,„r-,     MARSHAiiSEA,  Court  OP.]     ^qq  t\i\Q^  Attorney ;   Court  {Infe- 
Plbo]    .    ^ 
"-  nor). 

Mason's  Company.]     Cleric;  Restoration. — The  writ  lies  to  restore 
.0  the  office  of  Clerk  of  the  Company  of  Masons  in  London. (/i) 

Master  op  College.]     See  titles  College  {Master);  School  (Master.) 

Master  of  School.]     See  titles   College  (Master) ;  School  (Master.) 

Mayor.]     The  writ  lies  for  the  office  of  mayor,  because  it  is  a  public 
one,  and  concerns  public  government.(t) 
The  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 

Mayor. 

Election        -         -  -  -  165 

Application  -  -  -  166 

Affidavits       -  -  -  167 

Rule      -         -  -  -  167 

Form  of  writ  -  -  167 

Admission   -         -  -  -  167 

.]     Election. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  corporation,  or  other 


Swearing  in          -         - 

-     167 

Return 

-     168 

To  perform  duties 

-     168 

Application  - 

-     168 

Return        .         -         -         - 

-     168 

Restoration 

-     168 

municipal  body  to  assemble  and  proceed  to  the  election  of  a  mayor,  un- 
der stat.  11  Geo.  l,c.4,  s.  2;{J)  although  there  have  been  no  legal  mayor 
for  some  years  ;(/c)  and  for  the  purpose  of  such  election,  the  Court  will, 
if  necessary,  command  the  holding  of  a  Court  leet ;(?)  or  that  the  corpo- 

(A)  Stamp's  case,  Comb.  348.     See  tit.  "Office"  (Restoration.) 

{{)  Scarborough's  case,  H.  16  Geo.  2,  Stra.  1180,  and  cases  tliere  cited.  Mana- 
ton's  case,  Raym.  365.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  See  stat.  9  Anne,  c.  20,  and  stats. 
1 1  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  and  1  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  26 ;  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12  (I.),  App.  See  tit.  "  Office" 
Public.) 

(/)  See  stat.  App.,  and  also  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12  (I.),  App.  R.  v.  Heydon,  (Al- 
dermen,) Say.  208.  R.  v.  Newsham,  Say.  211.  R.  v.  Plymouth  (Borough),  1  Barn. 
81,  130.  R.  V.  Bridgewater  (Corp.),  3  Doug.  378.f  Scarborough  case,  Stra.  1180, 
and  cases  there  cited ;  2  T.  R.  732,  n.  R.  v.  Colchester,  (Mayor,)  4  Doug.  14.f  R. 
V.Robinson,  8  Mod.  336.  R.  v.  Robinson,  Stra.  555.  R.  v.  Morgan,  7  Mod.  322.  R. 
V.  West  Looe,  (Corp.)  Burr.  1386.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  Burr.  2008.  R.  v. 
Hoskins,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  188.  R.  v.  Truro,  (Mayor)  2  Chit.  257.t  But  see  Townsend's 
case,  1  Keb.  458.  R.  v.  Edyvean.  3  T.  R.  352.  R.  v.  Abingdon,  (Mayor)  licit,  441. 
See  tits.  "Corporation"  (Municipal),  "Office"  (Election),  and  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c. 
89,  App.,  which  now  regulates  the  law  of  England  upon  this  subject;  the  provi- 
sions of  which  statute  have  not  been  extended  to  Ireland. 

(k)  R.  V.  Oxford,  M.  9  Geo.  2;  Bull.  N.  P.  201,  a,  7th  edit.;  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."  (A.)  R.  v.  Truro,  (Mavor)  2  Chit.  257-1 

(0  R.  V.  Bankes,  1  W.  Blac."  444.  S.  C.  Burr.  1452.  R.  v.  Curghey,  Burr.  782. 
Bull.  N.  P.  196,  197.  Borough  of  Christchurch  case,  12  Geo.  2.  See  tits. 
"Courts  Inferior,"  "  Manor"  (Leet). 


MAYO  R. 


215 


rators  assemble,  and  proceed  to  the  election. (m)  Usually  on  applications 
of  this  kind,  the  office  of  mayor  is  vacant,(w)  but  the  court  will  grant 
such  *writ,  although  there  may  have  been  a  void  election  ;(o)  or  r:i:;^Q0-| 
though  there  may  be  a  mayor,  de  facto,  but  not  de  jure;(j^)  for 
the  court  has  a  discretionary  power  upon  considering  all  the  circumstan- 
stances  of  the  election,  to  award  or  not  the  writ  of  mandamus,  as  the  jus- 
tice of  the  case  may  require.  Thus,  if  on  all  the  circumstances  of  an 
election  de  facto,  the  legality  thereof  be  doubtful,  the  Court  will  not 
award  the  writ,  it  being  in  such  case  proper,  that  the  legality  thereof 
should  be  tried  on  an  information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto.  But 
if,  on  the  contrary,  upon  all  the  circumstances  of  such  an  election,  it  ap- 
pear to  be  clearly  illegal,  or  merely  colourable,  and  therefore  void  (as  by 
the  incompetency  of  the  party  elected,  or  the  irregularity  of  the  election,) 
the  Court  ought  to,  and  will  award  a  mandamus  to  proceed  to  a  new  elec- 
tion, because  it  would,  in  the  latter  case,  be  nugatory  to  try  the  legality 
of  the  election,  by  the  information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto. (5). 
Thus  where  a  person  is  elected  mayor  for  a  year  immediately  succeeding 
that  during  which  he  has  served  the  office,  and  which,  by  stat.  9  Ann.  c. 
20,  s.  8,  is  void,  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  to  proceed  to  another 
election,  pursuant  to  stat.  7  Wm.  4  and  1  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  26.(/')  So 
where  the  mayor  who  presides  at  the  election  of  a  new  mayor  is  only 
mayor  de  facto  and  not  de  jure,  and  is  subsequently  removed  by  judg- 
ment of  ouster,  the  election  of  the  new  mayor  is  void,  and  the  Court  will 
grant  a  mandamus  for  the  election  of  a  new  mayor,  under  stat.  11  Geo. 
1,  c.  4,  although  a  quo  warranto  be  depending  against  the  present  may- 
or.(s) 

So  the  writ  lies  to  command  a  return  of  the  name  of  the  person  elected 
mayor.(^)  A  jurat  who  has  neglected  to  take  the  Sacrament,  pursuant  to 
stat.  13  Car.  2  c.  1,  may  be  elected  mayor;  for  the  stat.  5  Geo.  1,  c.  6, 

(m)  R.  V.  Edyvean,  3  T.  R.  352. 

(n)  R.  V.  Bedford,  (Corp.)  1  East,  79.  R.  v.  Stoke,  Damarel,  5  A.  &  E.  589. 
S.  0.  1  N.  &  P.  56.t     See  tit.  "Office,"  (Election). 

(0)  R.  V.  Newsliam,  Say.  211.  Case  of  Bossiney,  H.  8  Geo.  2,  Stra.  1003.  Case 
of  Aberystwith,  T.  14  Geo.  2,  Stra.  1157.  R.  v.  Pembroke,  (Corp.)  8  D.  302.  R. 
V.  Cambridge,  (Mayor)  Burr.  2008 ;  1  East,  79,  supra.  See  stats.  9  Anne,  c.  20,  s. 
8,  7  Wm.  4  &  1  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  26,  App.     See  tit.  "Office"  (Election). 

(p)  R.  V.  Colchester,  (Mayor)  2  T.  R.  260.  R.  v.  Bankes,  Burr.  1454.  S.  C.  1 
W.  Blac.  445.  Anon.,  1  Barn.  138  ;  Andr.  280 ;  15  Vin.  Abr.  216,  (z)  pi.  1 ;  3  Bac. 
Abr.  540.  And  see  Stra.  1003,  1157,  and  Burr.  2008,  supra.  See,  as  to  Ireland, 
stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  s.  8. 

(q)  See  ante,  p.  15,  26.  Say.  212,  supra.  R.  v.  Cambridge,  (Mayor)  H.  7  Geo.  3, 
Burr.  2008.  R.v.  Colchester,  (Mayor)  4  Doug.  14.  R.  v.  Bedford,  (Corp.)  1  East, 
79,  and  n.  (h).  R.  v.  Bankes,  Burr,  1454.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  445.  R.  v.  Colchester, 
(Mayor)  2  T.  R.  260.  Bossiney's  case,  Stra.  1003.  R.  v.  Stoke  Damerel,  5  A.  & 
E  589.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  56.t  And  see  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  2  T.  R.  334,  and  R.  v.  York, 
4  T.  R.  699.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  See  tits.  "Churchwarden"  (Election,) 
"Councillor,  &c.,"  (Election),  "Office"  (Election). 

(?•)  R.  y.  Pembroke,  (Corp.),  8  D.  302.     R.  v.  Cambridge,  (Mayor)  Burr.  2008. 

(s)  R.  V.  Bridgewater,  (Corp.)  3  Doug.  379.f  See  as  to  Ireland,  stat.  19  Geo.  2, 
c.  12  App. 

(t)  Martin  v.  Jenkins,  7  Mod.  365.     S.  C.  Stra.  1145.     And  see  Burr.  1013. 


216  tapping's    mandamus. 

8.  3,  prevents  him  from  being  proceeded  against  on  account  of  this  omis- 
sion.(») 

.     Application. — It  has  been  held,  that  on  a  judgment  of  ouster 

against  a  mayor  de  facto,  a  mandamus  to  elect  a  new  mayor  will  not  be 
granted,  until  after  the  four-day  rule  for  judgment  shall  have  expired, 
and  *such  judgment  shall  have  been  actually  signed. (<;)  The  pro- 
L  -'  sccutor  of  the  information,  &c.  is  entitled  to  priority  of  motion 
for  the  rule.(K-) 

The  application  to  the  Court  is  now  governed  by  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89, 
Appendix,  the  requisition  of  which  should  be  strictly  complied  with. 
This  statute  has  not  been  extended  to  Ireland. 

.  Affidavits. — When  first  the  writ  was  moved  for,  after  the  pass- 
ing of  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  an  afiidavit  of  the  facts  was  always  produced 
but  such  an  affidavit  is  not  requisite. (a;) 

,  Rule. — The  rule  to  proceed  to  the  election  of  a  mayor,  is  abso- 
lute in  the  first  instance,  in  those  cases  where  the  mayor  holds  over,  or 
where  an  actual  vacancy  by  means  of  death  has  occurred,(3/)  or  where  the 
election  is  absolutely  void.(2)  In  all  cases  where  there  is  a  subsisting 
mayor  de  facto,  he  must  be  served  with  notice  of  application  for  the  writ, 
and  be  made  a  party  to  the  rule  and  writ,  (a) 

.     Form  of  Writ;  Direction. — The  writ  must  be  directed  to  the 

corporation  by  its  corporate  name,  although  there  may  be  no  mayor  at  the 
time  the  writ  is  granted. (?>) 

.]     Admission. — The  writ  lies  to  command  admission  to  the  office 

of  mayor(c)  of  one  duly  entitled  to  such  admission. 

.]     Swearing  in. — At  one  time  it  was  unsettled  whether  the  writ  o* 

mandamus  lay  to  swear  in  to  the  office  of  mayor. (cZ)  But  is  now  clearly 
settled,  that  on  a  proper  case  made,  the  writ  will  be  granted  to  swear  in 
such  an  officer,  or  any  other  head  officer  of  a  municipal  corporation, (e) 

(w)  Supra, note  (<).     See  tit.  "Jurat." 

(t>)  R.  V.  West  Doe  (Corp.),  Burr.  1386.  And  see  R.  v.  Ollerhead,  or  R.  v.  Wigan 
(Corp.),  Burr.  782,  785,  overruled  as  to  this  point.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A). 

{w)  Burr.  1387,  supra. 

{x)  Anon.,  Burr.  235.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application,"  (Affidavits). 

{y)  Anon.,  2  Chit.  257-1  R.  t.  Arnold,  4  A.  &  E.  GoQ.f  R.  v.  Heydon  (Alder- 
men).  Say.  208.  R.  v.  Colchester  (Mayor),  4  D.  14,  where  see  form  of  rule.  See 
post,  tit.  "  Rule." 

(2)  Ante,  p.  166.     R.  v.  Pembroke  (Corp.),  8  D.  302. 

{a)  R.  V.  Bankes,  1  W.  Blac.  445.  S.  C.  Burr.  1452.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A). 
R.  V.  St.  Martin's,  1  T.  R.  149.  R.  v.  Truro  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  A.  592.t  Bac.  Abr. 
tit.  "  Man."  (D).  See  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89.  App.,  which  has  not  been  extended  to 
Ireland.  Ante,  p.  165,  n.  (/). 

(6)  R.  V.  Bridgewater  (Corp.),  3  Doug.  379.t  R.  v.  Bedford  (Corp.),  1  East,.  79. 
R.  V.  Pembroke  (Corp.),  8  D.  304.     See  post,  tit.  "Writ"  (Direction). 

(c)  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  451,  where  see  form  of  writ ;  also  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  445,  a  form  to 
admit  and  swear  in.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (C).  See  tit.  "Office"  (Admission). 
As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  s.  1,  App. 

{d)  Anon.,  Sty.  299,  where  Roll,  C.  J.,  said,  there  was  no  precedent  to  swear  such 
an  officer,  yet  ordered  that  notice  should  be  given  to  the  town,  and  precedents  to  be 
brought  into  Court,  if  any,  to  warrant  it. 

(e)  R.  V.  Stephens,  Sir  T.  Jon.  177,  215.    Patrick's  case,  Raym.  111.    R.  v.  Hull, 


MAYOR.  217 

upon  production  of  an  affidavit  that  be  or  they  have  not  been  sworn  in. (/) 
*Thus  it  has  been  granted  to  command  the  swearing  in  of  the  newly 
elected  mayor,  and  to  command  him  to  appear  and  take  the  neces-  L  -^ 
sary  oaths,  &c.{g)  And  for  this  purpose,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will,  if  neces- 
sary, command  the  steward  of  a  Court  Leet  to  hold  a  Court,  and  the  jury 
to  present  to  such  steward  one  chosen  mayor,  in  order  to  be  sworn. (7i) 
But  the  Court  will  refuse,  even  at  the  prayer  of  the  Attorney  General,  a 
mandamus  to  command  the  swearing  in  of  one  as  mayor  after  a  peremptory 
mandamus  has  been  granted  to  swear  in  another  to  the  same  office. (t) 

.     Return. — It  has  been  held  to  be  a  good  return  to  a  mandamus 

to  swear  in,  &c.,  that  judgment  has  been  previously  given  against  the 
applicant  in  an  information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto,  and  that  he 
has  not  since  qualified. (j) 

.]  To  perform  Duties,  &c. — So  the  writ  will  be  granted  to  com- 
mand the  person  duly  elected  mayor,  or  any  other  public  officer,  to  take 
upon  himself  the  duties  of  his  office. (^) 

.     Ajyph'cation. — The  affidavits  in  support  of  the  application  for  a 

writ  for  the  above  purpose  need  only  state  the  election  and  refusal  to  enter 
upon  the  duties  of  the  office.  (^) 

.     Return. — To  such  a  madamus,  a  return  of  any  legal  excuse  or 

privilege  will  be  good.(m) 

.]     Restoration. — The  writ  will  also  be  granted  to  restore  to  the 

office  of  mayor,  on  an  unjust  deprivation,  &c.  •,{n)  but  not  if  his  year  of 
service  have  elapsed.  So  if  he  be  entitled  to  hold  over,  and  no  one  have 
been  subsequently  elected,  he  is  entitled  to  the  writ.(o) 

11  Mod.  390.  S.  C.  Stra.  625.  S.  C.  Bro.P.  C.  178  ;  Ld.  Raym.  1447  ;  Cowp.  509.  R.  v. 
Tregony  (Mayor),  8  Mod.  Ill,  and  cases  there  cited.  S.  C.  BMod.  127  ;  Stra.  354.  R. 
V.  Searle,  8  Mod.  332  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Quo  Warranto"  (C.  5).  See  forms  of  writs, 
Trem.  PI.  Cor.  453,  454,  514.  See  tits.  "  Churchwardens"  (Swearing  in),  "  Office" 
(Swearing  in). 

(/)  R.  V.  Montacute  (Ld.),  1  W.  Blac.  61.     S.  C.  1  Wils.  283. 

(g)  R.  V.  Bedford  (Corp.),  1  East,  80.  Manaton's  case,  Raym.  365,  where  see  a 
form  of  return.  Trem.  450.  Veal's  case,  Raym.  431  ;  Trem.  454.  See  tits.  "  Col- 
lege".'(Oaths),  "  Constable"  (Swearing in),  "  Oaths,"  "  Office"  (Restoration  Returns). 

Ui)  Ante,  p.  150.  R.  v.  Christchurch,  M.  12,  G.  2,  or  R.  Willis,  Andr.  279.  R. 
V.  Montacute  (Ld.),  1  W.  Blac.  62.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283  ;  1  W.  Blac.  444.  S.  C.Burr. 
1453,  supra.  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  699,  3.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  559.  See 
tit.  "  Manor"  (Leet). 

(?)  R.  V.  Turner,  T.  Jones,  215,  and  cited  in  R.  v.  Clarke,  2  East,  82.  Sed  Vide. 
R.  V.  Harris,  Burr.  1422.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

(y)  R.  V.  Hull,  11  Mod.  390.  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Hearle,  Stra.  625.  S.  C.  3  Bro. 
P.  C.  178,  Ld.  Raym.  1447,  and  seeCowp.  509.     See  post,  tit.  "  Return." 

[k)  R.  V.  Leyland,  3  M.  &  S.  184.  R.  v.  Simmons,  3  Doug.  237.t  R.  v.  Colches- 
ter (Mayor),  4  Doug.  14.1  R.  v.  Bedford  (Corp.),  1  East,  80.  In  re  Walsall,  1  H.  & 
W.  370.  See  tits.  "  Alderman"  (Enforcing  Duty),  "  Corporation  Municipal"  (Duties, 
&c.),  "Office"  (Enforcing  Duty). 

{I)  3  Doug.  237  ;f  and  4  Doug.  14,f  supra.  See  post.  tit.  "  Application." 

(m)  3  M.  &  S.  184,  supra.     See  post,  tit.  "Return." 

\n)  See  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  1,  App.  Mayor  of  Durham's  case,  1  Sid.  33.  R.  v. 
Searle,  18  Mod.  334.  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration).  As  to  Ireland  see  stat.  19  Geo. 
2,  c.  12,  s.  1,  App. 

(o)  1  Sid.  33  ;  8  Mod.  334,  supra.  R.  v.  Hearle,  Stra.  625.  S.  C.  3  Bro.  P.  C. 
178.     S.  C.  nom.  R.v.  Hull,  11  Mod.  390. 


218  tapping's    mandamus. 

Mayor's  Court.]     See  titles  Courts  Inferior ;  London. 

Merchant  Tailors'  Company.]  Election. — The  writ  lies  to  command 
*the  Merchant  Tailors'  Company  to  call  a  meeting  of  the  company 
^  J  on  the  next  annual  day  of  election,  for  the  purpose  of  electing  a 
master  and  wardens  according  to  their  charter ;  but  if  it  be  suggested  as 
the  ground  of  the  motion  that  the  officers  de  facto  were  improperly  elected 
by  a  part  only  of  the  company  instead  of  the  whole  body  the  Court  will 
refuse  the  writ.(p) 

Meeting  House.]     See  tit.  Dissenters  {Meeting  House.) 

Militia.]  Commissioners. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to  command 
the  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Anglesea  to  declare  commissions  in  the  militia 
vacant.  (^) 

Minister.]     See  titles  Dissenters  (Minister')  ;  Livings;  Parson. 

Mint.]  Restoration. — It  has  been  decided,  that  the  writ  of  mandamus 
lies  to  restore  to  the  office  of  "  workman  in  the  Mint."{r)  But  in  ano- 
ther case,  where  it  was  applied  for  to  restore  to  the  office  of  "  Moneyer  of 
the  Mint,"  the  Court  refused  the  application;  because  no  sufficient  interest 
in  the  employment  appeared,  and  no  more  than  a  mere  service  was  dis- 
closed, as  that  of  a  coalmeter,  filler,  clerk  of  the  waters,  &c.  in  London : 
and  it  was  ordered  that  a  special  suggestion  be  made,  that  it  was  an  office 
granted  by  patent,  (.s)  the  nature  of  the  office  should  therefore  appear  in 
the  writ. 

As  to  the  office  of  Mint  master  being  in  its  nature  incompatible  with 
that  of  Alderman,  see  London  (City)  v.  Swallow. (^) 

Modus.]     See  titles  Inclosure;   Tithe. 

Money.]  The  writ  lies  to  command  the  treasurer  and  directors  of  a 
company  to  pay  a  sum  of  money  awarded  to  be  due  from  the  company, 
when  the  act  of  Parliament  incorporating  the  company  does  not  authorise 
execution  to  issue  against  the  effects  of  individual  members  of  such  cor- 
poration, (m)  It  also  lies  to  command  an  overseer  to  pay  money  due  under  a 

{p)  Ante,  p.  11.  R.  v.  Attwood,  4  B.  &  Ad.  482.f  R.  v.  Chester  (Citizens),  1 
M.  &  S.  101.  See  tits.  "  Charter,"  "  Company,"  "  Corporation"  (Municipal),  "  Office" 
(Election). 

(q)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  206. 

(r)  Sterling  al  Monier's  case,  1  Sid.  304,  2  B.  8,  as  to  which  quaere,  the  report 
does  not  show  the  nature  of  the  office.  See  also  2  Keb.  91.  See  tit.  "Office" 
(Restoration). 

(s)  R.  V.  Sterling,  2  Keb.  65,  91.    See  tits.  "  Ashburton"  (Eight  Men  of),  "Office." 

(t)  2  Keble,  50.     See  tit.  "  Office,"  p.  1V2,  17.3  (Incompatible  Office). 

(m)  Ante,  p.  23.     R.  v.  St.  Katharine's  Dock,  4  B.  &  Ad.  360.-J-    Wormwell  v. 


M  O  N  K.  219 

parish  contract. (v)  Before  however  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus 
for  *the  payment  of  money  by  a  parish  or  corporation,  &c.,  it  p^^yQ-. 
will  first  ascertain  whether  the  debt  be  clearly  existent.  Thus, 
although  the  stat.  43  Geo.  3,  c.  110,  s.  2,  provides,  that  a  twentieth  part 
at  least  of  the  sums  borrowed  by  visitors  and  guardians  of  the  poor,  under 
.stat.  22  Geo.  3,  c.  83,  s.  20,  shall  be  paid  off  or  provided  for  every  year; 
yet  the  debt  is  not  extinguished  in  cases  where  no  such  payment  or  pro- 
vision has  been  made  for  twenty  years.  So  that  on  the  application  of  one 
who  has  advanced  money  since  the  passing  of  stat.  43  Geo.  3,  c.  110,  but 
more  than  twenty  years  before  the  application,  and  notwithstanding  the 
parish  had  neither  paid  nor  provided  for  any  part  of  the  principal,  and 
some  interest  was  due,  the  Court  granted  a  mandamus  to  the  guardians, 
&c.  to  pay  the  principal  and  interest,  but  refused  to  grant  a  writ  to  make 
a  rate  for  payment  of  the  principal  and  interest. (?«)  But  wherever  there 
exists  a  specific  legal  remedy  whereby  the  money  can  be  recovered,  the 
mandamus  will  be  therefor  refused. (.r) 

As  to  accounting  for  a  payment  of  money  to  or  by  a  constable,  &c.  See 
titles  Constable;  Municipal  Corporation  {Insignia) ;   Overseer. 

MoNEYER  OF  THE  MiNT.]  See  titles  Ashhurton  {Eight  Men  of); 
Mint. 

Monk.]     Restoration. — The  writ  lies  not  to  restore  a  monk.(?/) 
Indeed  for  monks,  a  mandamus  was  never  granted,  because  they  were 
Ecclesiastical  and  had  a  proper  visitor. (2) 

Newcastle,  Hostmen  of.]  Admission. — The  writ  lies  to  command 
an  admission  into  the  fraternity  of  the  hostmen  in  Newcastle-upon- 
Tyne.(a; 

Newgate.]  Payment  of  Fees. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  county 
treasurer  of  Middlesex,  to  pay  to  the  clerk  of  the  Session  of  gaol  delivery 

Hailstone,  6  Bing.  668.  See  tits.  "A-svard,"  "Company,"  "Compensation"  (Exe- 
cution), "Execution,"  "Patent."  R.  v.  Victoria  Park,  4  P.  &  D.  643.  S.  C.  1  Q. 
B.  292.f     R.  V.  Dewsbury  Roads,  4  Jur.  26. 

((')  R.  V.  Beeston,  3  T.  R.  592.  See  tits.  "Contract,"  "Overseers,"  "Parish," 
"Poor"  (Relief  Maintenance). 

(w)  R.  V.  Carpenter,  6  A.  &  E.  794.f  R.  v.  St.  Saviour's  (Parish),  1  A.  &  E.  943.f 
S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  126.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  496  jf  and  see  6  A.  &  E.  "798,1  n.  (a).  See 
tits.  "Parish"  (Loan),  "Rate." 

\x)  Ante,  p.  23.     See  tits.  "  Compensation,"  "  Execution,"  "Patent." 

{y)  R.  v.  London  Waterworks,  1  Lev.  123,  per  Wyndham,  J.  See  Middleton's 
case,  1  Sid.  163,  per  Wyndham,  J.  See  tits.  "  Abbot,"  "  Knight  Templar,"  "  Office," 
"Prior,"  "  Visitor." 

{2)  Ante,  p.  22.  See  Mr.  Leigh's  case,  §  Mod.  334,  and  Appleford's  case,  1  Mod. 
84.     Dr.  Withrington's  case,  1  Sid.  71.     See  tits.  "Proctor,"  "Visitor." 

{a)  R.  V.  Newcastle  Hostmen  Company,  Stra.  1223.  See  tits.  "Company," 
"Franchise,"  "Freedom,"  "Freeman." 


220  tapping's    mandamus. 

of  Newgate,  a  fee  certain,  or  sum  of  money  for  all  convicts  sentenced  to 
transportation. (/^) 

New  River  Water.]  Surveyor ;  Restoration. — The  writ  has  been 
granted  to  restore  to  the  office  of  surveyor  of  the  new  river  water. (c) 

r*1711         * "^      Treasurer;    Restoration. — A  mandamus  has  been 

granted  to  restore  to  the  office  of  treasurer  of  the  new  river,  (r/) 
it  being  alleged  to  be  an  office  of  public  concern,(e)  the  writ  was  not  a 
peremptory  one,  but  de  bene  esse  only,  in  order  to  bring  the  matter  before 
the  Court,  though  it  was  a  corporation,  settled  by  act  of  Parliament. (/) 

Nev7  Trial.  See  titles  Courts  Inferior  (^New  Trial) ;  Quarter  Ses- 
sions. 

Nuisance.]  Removal. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  the 
removal  and  abatement  of  a  nuisance,  as  a  bowling  green,  without  the 
formality  of  the  proceedings  ordinarily  taken,  as  on  indictment,  &e.,(ff) 
but  the  fact  of  the  nuisance  must  be  made  certain  either  by  matter  of 
record,(/t)  as  by  the  presentment  of  a  grand  jury,  or  by  the  justices  at 
Westminster,  who  may  on  their  own  view,  command  the  nuisance  to  be 
abated.  ({) 

So  the  writ  lies  to  command  the  Quarter  Sessions  to  give  judgment  for 
abating  a  nuisance. (^*) 

Oaths  of  Allegiance.]  See  tit.  Manor  (Court  Leet;  Oath  of 
Allegiance). 

Oaths.]  See  titles  College  (Oaths);  Dissenters  (Ministers);  Office 
(Restoration  Return)  ;    Toleration  Act. 

(b)  R.  V.  Baker,  &c.,  2  N.  &  P.  375.  S.  C.  7  A.  &  E.  502.t  See  tits.  "  Gaol," 
"  County,"  "  Money,"  "  Office"  (Inferior). 

(c)  Anon.  Comb.  347,  cited  in  Anon.,  1  Barn.  135.  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restora- 
tion). 

(d)  R.  V.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233,  11,  13,  and  cases  there  cited;  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"Man."  C. 

(e)  R.  V.  Rushworth,  Kel.  287.  Middleton's  case,  1  Sid.  169.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  G25, 
629.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  123,  nom.  R.  v.  New  Waterworks  (Governors).  The  Court, 
however,  much  doubted  whether  mandamus  lay  in  this  case,  but  it  being  strongly 
pressed  by  Maynard,  the  Attorney-General,  and  Wylde  and  all  the  King's  Counsel, 
to  have  the  writ,  the  Court  consented  it  should  go,  and  that  they  would  consider 
further  upon  the  return  thereof.  S.  C.  approved  in  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T. 
R.  182,  n.  (b)  ;  Calthorp's  Rep.  56;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  See  tit.  "Office" 
(Public). 

(/)  Leigh's  case,  3  Mod.  334.  S.  C.  1  Show.  252.  See  1  Keb.  631,  supra  Where 
it  is  said  that  the  Court  doubted  whether  restitution  would  ever  be  granted.  See 
tit.  "  Act  of  Parliament." 

(g)  R.  V.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Comb.,  282,  per  Holt,  C.  J.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  237  ;  Ld. 
Raym.  277,  608;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) 

(A)  Hall's  case,  1  Mod.  76,  and  cited  in  Comb.  282. 

(i)  Comb.  282,  and  4  Mod.  237,  supra.     See  tit.  "Presentment." 

(y)  Cited  in  Dr.  Walker's  case,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  214.  See  tits.  "Courts,  Inferior" 
(Judgment),  "  Quarter  Sessions." 


OFFICE. 


221 


Office.]  The  writ  of  maudamus,  founded  it  is  said  upon  a  passage(  j)') 
of  Magna  Charta,  c.  29,(/.:)  has  been  by  a  great  number  of  cases  held  to 
be  *grantablc,  as  well  to  admit  liim  who  has  a  right  as  to  restore  r*]^'72"| 
him  who  has  been  wrongfully  displaced,  to  any  office,  function,  or 
franchise  of  a  public  nature,  whether  spiritual  or  temporal,  judicial  or 
ministerial,((')  and  also  to  command  the  officers  thereof,  to  do  all  legal  acts 
constituting  or  connected  with  their  official  duties,  provided  there  be  no 
other  specific  legal  remedy,  whereby  they  can  be  enforced. (>yi).  If,  how- 
ever, there  formerly  might  have  been  a  specific  legal  remedy,  as  by  writ 
of  assize,  or  other  process,  which  has  since  fallen  into  desuetude,  in  such 
cases  the  writ  of  mandamus  will  nevertheless  be  granted. (/i) 

This  most  important  and  extensive  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


Office. 

Office 

1st.  For  what  offices 

- 

1'73 

Affidavits       .         .         - 

Public 

- 

113 

Rule     -        -        -        - 

Known  to  the  law 

- 

174 

Writ  (Form  of)              -         - 

Freehold      -         -        - 

. 

174 

Returns          _         -         - 

Returns 

_ 

175 

Travei'ses 

Fees  attached 

. 

176 

Incapax 

2nd.  Officers 

_ 

176 

Not  qualified 

Need  not  be  sworn 

_ 

176 

Non  fuit  electus 

Judicial  and  ministerial 

- 

176 

Condition  precedent 

Deputy         .         -         - 

- 

177 

Oaths 

Admission 

. 

177 

5th. 

Swearing  in              -         - 

Restoration 

- 

178 

Rule 

Application    - 

- 

178 

Returns        .         -         -         - 

Of  Costs       -   _     - 

- 

178 

Non  fuit  electus   -         -        - 

Ecclesiastical 

- 

178 

6th. 

Enforcing  Duties 

Spiritual 

- 

178 

7th. 

Deprivation      -         -         - 

3rd.  Election 

- 

179 

8th. 

Restoration 

Definite  number 

- 

179 

S 

aspension            .         -         - 

Notice  of  application 

- 

183 

Application 

Affidavits,  &c. 

- 

184 

Rule 

Application 

- 

184 

Writ  (Form  of )      - 

Priority  of  motion 

- 

184 

Returns          .         .         - 

Rule     - 

- 

184 

1.  Traverses 

Writ  (Form  of)      - 

- 

185 

Non  fuit  amotus 

4th.  Admission 

- 

185 

Non  fuit  admissus  - 

Application  - 

- 

186 

Non  appunctuatus 

186 
186 
186 
186 
186 
186 
186 
187 
187 
187 
188 
188 
188 
188 
189 
190 
190 
192 
193 
193 
194 
194 
194 
194 
194 
194 


(_;i7)  Ante,  p.  2,  5.  Nullus  liber  homo  capiatur  vel  imprisonetur,  aut  disseisietur 
de  iibero  tenemento  suo,  vel  libertatibus,  vel  liberis  consuetudinibus  suis,  aut  utla- 
getur,  aut  exuletur,  aut  aliquo  modo  destruatur ;  nee  super  eum  ibimus,  nee  super 
eum  mittemus,  nisi  per  legale  judicium  parium  suorum,  vel  per  legem  terrae;  nulli 
vendemus,  nulli  negabimus  aut  differemus  justitiam  vel  rectum. 

(k)  Bull.  N.  P.  195.  Dolben's  case,  1  Keb.  872,  852.  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1 
Wils.  11.     S.  C.  Stra.  1192.     R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  180. 

It  was  not,  however,  usual  to  grant  the  writ  in  order  to  try  titles  to  offices  before 
Stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20.     Knipe  v.  Edwin,  4  Mod.  281. 

(I)  3  Blac.  Com.  110.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  93;  2  Sid.  112.  Audley's  case, 
Latch.  123.  S.  C.  Poph.  176.  Middleton's  case,  3  Dyer,  332,  b.  n.  333,  pi.  28;  and 
see  R.  V.  Godwin,  1  Doug.  397.  For  a  definition  of  the  term  office,  see  Bac.  Abr. 
tits.  "  Officer"  (A.),  "  Man."  C.     See  post,  p.  173. 

(m)  Ante,  p.  12,  18—27.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  1  W.  Blac.  552.  S.  C.  Burr. 
1C47.     See  tit.  "Alderman"  (Duties,  &c.),  and  post,  tit.  "  Enforcing  Duties." 

{n)  Ante,  p.  5,  n.  (A),  19,  n.  (p),  20,  n.  {q),  (r),  (*),  and  the  numerous  cases  there 
cited.     R.  V.  Wheeler,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  99 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B). 


222 


tapping's    mandamus. 


Office — eontimied. 

Non  fuit  electus  -  194 

No  such  office  -  194 

2.  Special  Returns     -  -  194 

1.  Causes  of  Removal  -  195 

Bribery  -         -  -  196 

Desertion,  non-residence, 

&c.  -         .  -  196 

Drunkenness  -  -  197 

Erasing  Corpr.  Books  -  197 
Incapacity    to     execute 

office  -         -  -  197 

Incompatible  office  -  197 

Libel  -         -  -  197 

Neglect  of  Duty,  &c.  -  198 


Office — continued. 

Oaths    -         -         -         -  198 

Statement  of  removal     -  198 

2.  Power  of  removal  -  199 

3.  Summons      -         -         -  200 

When  necessary      -  200 

For  what  offices       -  201 

Form  of  -         -  202 

Allegation    of   summons 

in  return    -         -         -  202 

4.  Proof  of  causes  of  remo- 

val   -         -         -         -  203 

5.  Removal    founded    on 

causes  alleged    -         -  204 

9th.  CompensatioQ  -         -  204 


[*173] 


* .]     1st.  For  what    Offices. — It  may  be    here   generally 


stated, (o)  that  the  writ  of  mandamus  lies  for  all  offices  of  a  public(  p) 
nature,  whether  spiritual,  temporal,  corporate,  kQ,.,{q)  judicial  or  ministe- 
rial for  which  there  exists  no  specific  legal  remedy. (/•) 

The  writ  lies  also  fer  a  function  with  emoluments  or  fees  annexed,  if 
there  be  no  specific  legal  remedy.  Thus,  it  lies  to  admit  a  dissenting 
minister  to  the  use  of  the  pulpit  of  a  dissenting  meeting  house, (s)  which 
cannot  be  considered  an  office,  it  is  in  fact  a  function  merely,(/)  and  it  has 
since  been  held,  that  although  the  place  be  not  in  strictness  what  Lord 
Coke  would  have  termed  an  office,  yet  the  Court  will  not  on  that  account 
refuse  to  grant  the  writ.(w) 

.]     Public. — The  office  must  be  one  of  a  public  nature,  to  be  the 

subject  of  a  mandamus,(«;)  as  where  it  concerns  the  administration  of  jus- 
tice, as  a  leet,(w)  or  where  it  concerns  any  public  or  necessary  work,  or 

administration  of  government, (x)  or  where  the  office  or  function  is 
L         J  for  the  public  *weal.(y)   The  value  of  the  importance  to  the  public 


(o)  See  ante,  p.  12. 

(p)  See  definition  of  the  word  "Public,"  infra,  (Public). 

(q)  See  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  and  1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats. 
19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App.     Ante,  p.  172. 

(r)  Ante,  p.  18—27. 

(s)  See  tits.  "  Curate,"  "Dissenters,"  "Franchise,"  "Freedom."  R.  v.  Barker, 
Burr.  1270,  and  see  R.  v.  Land  Tax  Commissioners,  1  T.  R.  148.  See  Estwick  v. 
London  (City),  Sty.  42. 

(t)  See  1  T.  R.  148,  supra.     R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  11.     S.  C.  Stra.  1192. 

(m)  R.  v.  Darlington  Grammar  School,  cited  in  Ex  parte  Le  Cren,  2  D.  &  L.  574 ; 
and  see  ante,  p.  4. 

(v)  Ante,  p.  9,  12.  Anon.  1  Barn.  123;  Anon.  Comb.  133;  Sty.  457,  supra. 
(This  was,  however,  a  case  of  a  writ  of  restitution,  but  which  writ,  as  regarded 
offices,  was  the  same  as  mandamus,  ante,  p.  3.)  R.  v.  London  (City),  2  Barn.  398. 
Clerk  of  City  Works'  case,  2  Sid.  112.     Stamp's  case,  1  Sid.  40.     Middleton's  case, 

1  Sid.  169.     S.  C.  1  Keb.  625.     R.  v.  White,  3  Salk.  232.    Hurst's  case,  1  Lev.  75  ; 
Anon.  Comb.  41  ;  Anon.   Comb.   133;  Anon.  Comb.  347.     R.  v.  London  (Mayor), 

2  T.  R.  183,  n.  (b).    See  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Office"  (A.)    See  tit.  "  Reading"  (Steward). 
[w)  See  supra,  "Manor"  (Lcet  Steward).     R.  v.  New  River,  1  Keb.  629;  2  Sid. 

113,  sujira.     R.  v.  Blooer,  Burr.  1044. 

[x)  Supra.  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Constable,"  "  Manor"  (Leet  Steward). 
See  ante,  p.  12. 

(y)  Supra,  2  T.  R.  183,  n.  (b) ;  2  Sid.  112,  113;  Burr.  1044,  supra.  See  ante,  p. 
12,  and  tits.  "  Drainage,"  "  King's  Beam." 


OFFICE.  223 

is  not  however  scrupulously  weighed.  (2)  There  must  he  an  absence  of 
any  specific  legal  remedy. (a) 

So  on  the  other  hand,  it  has  been  clearly  settled,  that  to  a  private 
office  which  docs  not  concern  the  public,  neither  admission  nor  restitution 
will  be  granted  through  the  medium  of  the  writ  of  mandamus,(i)  as,  to 
the  place  of  clerk  of  a  private  company  in  London, (c)  or  of  steward  of  a 
Court  Baron,((i  )  &c.     See  the  several  titles  throughout  this  series. 

Nor  will  the  writ  be  granted  for  a  mere  private  appointment,  which 
may  be  terminated  at  the  will  of  the  appointor.  («?) 

.]      2Vie  office  must  he  known  to  the  Law. — So  the  Court  will  not 

grant  a  mandamus  to  admit  to  an  office  not  known  to  the  law,  as  to  that 
of  a  vestry  clerk,(/)  or  that  of  second  curate,(^)  nor  will  it  be  granted 
for  an  office  not  judicially  known  to  be  one,  unless  it  be  specially  de- 
scribed in  the  affidavits,  thus,  stating  an  office  to  be  "  one  of  the  eight 
men  of  Ashburn  Court"  was  held  insufficient,  the  duties  of  the  office  not 
being  described, (A)  nor  will  the  writ  be  granted  for  an  office  in  fieri. (t) 
But  although  the  exact  nature  or  quality  of  the  office  be  not  ascertained 
by  the  affidavits,  yet  if  they  be  prima  facie  sufficient,  the  Court  will  re- 
quire a  return. (^) 

,]     Freehold. — The  writ  of  mandamus  will  not  be  granted  for  an 

office  or  function  which  is  not  a  freehold ;  it  should  also  have  either  fees 
or  emoluments  annexed  to  it.(/i-)  Thus  it  lies  for  an  office  for  life,  or  for 
one  to  which  the  officer  is  appointed  quamdiu  se  bene  gesserit,  which  is  in 
law  a  freehold  for  life.(^) 

[z)  Ante,  p.  12,  n.  (r).  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  1265;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  '-Man."  257. 
R.  V.  Oxenden,  1  Show.  263. 

(a)  Ante,  pp.  5,  18,  2*7. 

\b)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  182,  n.  {b).  See  The  Protector 
V.  Craford,  Sty.  457.  Isle's  case,  1  Vent.  143 ;  3  Salk.  231,  9.  R.  v.  Ward,  Fitzg. 
194;  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  180.     "  Dissenters"  (Minister,  Admission),  (Restoration). 

(c)  See  tit.  "Clerk  of  Private  Company."  White's  case,  6  Mod.  Cas.  18  ;  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.) 

(rf)  Stamp's  case,  1  Sid.  40.  Middleton's  case,  1  Sid.  169.  Sec  tits.  "  Dean  and 
Chapter"  (Clerk,  Restoration),  "Manor"  (Court,  Baron,  Steward). 

(c)  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  178,  179.  See  tits.  "  Gustos  Breviura"  (Clerk), 
"Guardians"  (Clerk),  "Mint"  (Restoration). 

(/)  5  T.  R.  713.  R.  v.  St.  Nicholas  (Parish),  4  M.  &  S.  324.  See  tits.  "  Guar- 
dians of  Poor"  (Clerk),  "Vestry  Clerk." 

{<j)  Ante,  p.  113,  n.  [g).  Anonymous,  2  Chit.  253.  See  tit.  "  Ashburton"  (Eight 
Men  of). 

(/«)  Anon.  2  Mod.  316,  and  cases  there  cited;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.)  See 
tits.  "Ashburton"  (Eight  Men  of ),  "Tiverton"  (Twenty-four  men  of),  infra,  "Elec- 
tion." 

(i)  Ante,  p.  113,  n.  {g).   Anon.  2  Chit.  253. 

\j)  R.  V.  New  River,  1  Keb.  631. 

\k)  R.  V.  St.  Nicholas  Parish,  4  M.  &  S.  325.  Dighton's  case,  1  Vent.  82.  R.  v. 
Dolgelly  Union,  8  A.  ik  E.  562.f  The  case  of  Schriven  v.  Turner,  Stra.  832.  R. 
T.  Land  Tax  Commissioners,  1  T.  R.  147.  Estwick  v.  London  (City),  Sty.  42.  B. 
V.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  167.  Northampton's  case,  Lofft.  549.  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  180.  See 
tits.  "Councillor,"  "  Custos  Brevium"  (Clerk),  "Guardians"  (Clerk),  "Mint"  (Res- 
toration). 

(/)  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  178.  A  return  of  "  quamdiii  se  bene  gesserit," 
needs  not  "  et  non  diutius."     R.  v.  Holt,  3  Keb.  667.     See  post,  tit.  "Returns." 


224  tapping's    mandamus. 

r^,-.-|  ='Tlie  writ  will  be  denied,  if  the  place  be  a  merely  temjporary 
appoiutment,(m)  or  not  permancut,  as  where  the  office  is  held 
durante  bene  placito.(v()  So  if  the  body  which  appoints,  be  not  a  corpo- 
rate body,  but  be  merely  added  to,  as  guardians  of  the  poor,  &c.,  in  such 
case  the  duration  of  the  appointment  is  as  fluctuating  as  the  office  of  the 
appointors,  and  therefore  not  such,  for  which  mandamus  will  be  granted. (o) 
But  in  one  case,  where  on  the  one  side,  the  evidence  shewed  that  the  office 
was  not  legally  holdeu  for  life,  and  on  the  other,  that  it  had  usually  been 
so  holden,  and  that  it  was  accepted  on  that  understanding,  the  Court 
granted  a  peremptory  mandamus  to  command  an  award  of  compensation 
as  for  an  office  held  for  life.(jj) 

The  writ  does  not  lie  for  an  officer  at  will,(2')  nor  for  an  officer  who  is 
appointed  generally,  but  removable  at  will,(>')  but  it  will  lie  for  a  corpo- 
rate officer  although  the  appointment  be  general,  for  the  Court  will  look 
to  the  nature  of  the  appointment. (s) 

.     Returns. — It  has  been  held  to  be  a  good  return  to  a  mandamus, 

to  restore  an  officer  at  pleasure :  that  the  defendants  have  chosen  another 
officer,  and  that  thereby  the  prosecutor  was  removed ;  for  in  such  case  the 
election  of  a  new  officer  has  the  legal  operation  of  an  actual  amotion. (<) 
So,  a  return  that  states  merely  that  the  office  is  one  at  pleasure,  and  that 
the  prosecutor  has  been  removed  therefrom,  is  good  without  stating  the 
cause  of  the  removal,(it)  or  a  notice  of  removal  or  summons. (v)  But  the 
return  must  shew  that  the  will  or  pleasure  to  remove  has  been  declared, 
or  the  Court  will  grant  restitution. (zo)  Thus,  where  an  officer  at  will  was 
removed,  and  the  corporation  did  not  rely  upon  its  power  of  amotion,  but 
^  _  returned  insufficient  *matter,  a  peremptory  mandamus  was  granted 
L'    '   J  for  his  restoration.(?;i;)     But  if  the  prosecutor  ought  not  to  be  res- 

[m)  Supra,  n.  {a).  R.  v.  Croydon  (Churchwardens),  5  T.  R.  714.  R.  v.  Patrick, 
2  Keb.  167. 

[n)  Dighton  v.  Stratford  (Corp.),  1  Sid.  461.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  291.  S.  C.  1  Vent. 
TT.  S.  C.  1  Vent.  82.  S.  C.  Raym.  188.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  656.  See  Blagrave's  case, 
2  Sid.  49.  Warren's  case,  Cro.  Jac.  540,  and  cases  there  cited.  R.  v.  Thame 
(Guardians),  Stra.  115.  R.  v.  SLatford,  5  Mod.  316.  R.  v.  Tidderley,  1  Sid.  14 ; 
1  Vent.  77,  supra.     R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  178,  179. 

(o)  R.  V.  St.  Nicholas  Parish,  4  M.  &  S.  325.  See  also  5  T.  R.  713,  supra,  n.  (/). 
See  tit.  "Guardians  of  Poor"  (Clerk). 

(jo)  R.  t.  Norwich  (Mayor),  8  A.  &  E.  633.f     See  tit.  "  Compensation"  (Office). 

(2)  R.  V.  Oxon.  (Mayor),  Salk.  428,  3,  and  cases  there  cited,  and  see  2  Lev.  18. 

{r)  R.  V.  Coventry  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  430.    S.  C.  Ld.  Raym  391.    S.  C.  Holt,  438. 

(s)  Ante,  p.  130.     R.  v.  St.  Nicholas  Guardians,  4  M.  &  S.  325. 

{/)  Bull.  N.  P.  203.  R.  V.  Canterbury  (Mayor),  Str.  674.  Pepis'  case,  1  Vent. 
342.  R.  V.  Thame  (Churchwardens),  Str.  115.  R.  v.  Taunton  (Churchwardens), 
Cowp.  413.  R.  V.  Pateman,  2  T.  R.  777.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3.  See  infra, 
tit.  "Office"  (Restoration). 

[u)  Ante,  p.  12 — 15.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  2  Show.  69.  Blagrave's  case,  2 
Sid.  6,  49,  72.  Dighton's  case,  Ray.  188.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  461.  S.  C.  1  Vent.  77,  82. 
S.  C.  1  Lev.  291,  and  the  cases  there  cited.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  641,  641,  656.  R.  v.  Co- 
ventry (Mayor),  Salk.  430.  R  C.  Ld.  Raym.  391.  R.  v.  Slatford,  Comb.  419.  R. 
V.  Campion,  1  Sid.  14,  15. 

(v)  Dighton  v.  Stratford-upon-Avon,  2  Keb.  641.     See  infra,  "  Summons." 

\w)  R.  V.  Slatford,  Comb.  419.     S.  C.  5  Mod.  316.     See  infra,  "  Restoration." 

{vv)  R.  V.  Oxon.  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  428,  429,  430.  S.  C.  Holt,  438.  Bull.  N.  P. 
203.     Whiteacre's  case,  Str.  674.     R.  v.  Tidderley,  1  Sid.  14;  1  Vent.  77. 


OFFICE. 

tored,  the  Court  will  not  do  so,  although  the  return  be  insufficient,(w)  for 
it  will  not  grant  the  writ  to  do  that  which  is  manifestly  improper. 

The  return  of  a  custom  to  remove  ad  libitum  is  good,  but  must  be  re- 
turned positively,  and  not  byway  of  recital. (.'•)  The  Court  will  not  extend 
such  a  custom,  but  on  the  contrary,  will  construe  it  strictly.  Thus,  a 
custom  that  a  common  councilman  may  be  removed  at  pleasure  is  good, 
but  such  a  custom  cannot  be  extended  to  an  alderman  or  freeman. (y) 

.]     Fees,  Emoluments,  &c. — There  must  also  be  annexed  to  or 

issuing  out  of  the  office  fixed  fees  or  emoluments,  or  a  salary. (;:)  The 
office  must,  as  before  stated,  be  an  office  of  consequence  or  value  for  which 
there  does  not  exist  any  specific  legal  remedy.(a)  The  value,  however,  is 
not  scrupulously  weighed. (&) 

.]     2nd.      Officers  need  not  he  Sworn  Officers. — The  writ  will  be 

granted  for  officers,  who  are  not  sworn  to  perform  the  duties  of  the  offices, 
as  usher  of  a  school;  steward  of  a  leet;  churchwarden;  parish  clerk, 
&c.(c) 

.]     Judicial  and  Ministerial. — In  some  cases,  it  is  stated  to  be  a 

principle  as  to  the  dispensing  the  writ  of  mandamus,  that  it  never  issues 
to  command  officers  in  their  judicial  but  only  in  their  ministerial  capa- 
cities ;(<:0  this,  as  the  statement  of  a  principle,  is  certainly  erroneous,  for 
the  writ  lies  to  command  both  judicial  and  ministerial  officers. (e)  The 
form  of  it  in  the  two  cases,  is,  however,  different  in  this,  that  when  it 
issues  to  enforce  the  exercise  of  a  judicial  capacity,  it  is  general  in  its 
terms,  (/)  and  not  specific.  Thus,  it  would  merely  require  the  Judge  of 
an  inferior  Court  "to  adjudicate,^'  without  specifying  what  judgment  to 
give;  or,  in  other  words  "to  give  sentence,"  generally,  without  saying 
what  sentence  ;(</)  whereas  in  the  case  of  a  ministerial  officer,  the  p^-.  ^-^ 
writ  would,  in  terms,  specifically  command  the  performance  of 

(w)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Tidderley,  1  Sid.  14.  R.  v.  Griffiths,  5  B.  &  A.  731.f 
See  infra,  "Restoration." 

{x)  R.  V.  Coventry  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  391.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  430,  and  cases  there 
cited.  See  tits.  "  Councillor"  (Restoration  Return),  "  Custom."  See  post,  tit. 
"  Return." 

(y)  R.  V.  Thame  (Churchwardens),  Str.  115.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  2  Show.  69. 
Warren's  case,  Cro.  Jac.  540.  S.  C.  2  Roll.  112.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3.  See 
tit.  "Custom,"  and  post,  tit.  "Return." 

[z)  Ante,  p.  12,  n.  (r).  R.  v.  Croydon  (Churchwardens),  5  T.  R.  713.  The  Pro- 
tector V.  Craford,  Sty.  457,  per  Glyn,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Dr.  Askew,  Burr.  2186.  See  tits. 
"Lectureship,"  "Parson"  (Salary),  "Physicians'  College,"  "Reading"  (Steward). 

(«)  Ante,  p.  18—27.     R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  1  W.  Blac.  552.     S.  C.  Burr.  1647. 

(6)  Ante,  p.  12,  n.  {r).  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  1265.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  257. 
R.  V.  Oxenden,  1  Show.  263. 

(c)  City  Works  case,  2  Sid.  112,  per  Glyn,  C.  J.  Stamp's  case,  1  Sid.  40.  The 
Protector  v.  Craford,  Sty.  457.  Le  Parish  of  St.  Balaunce  case.  Palmer,  50.  See 
tits.  "Churchwarden,"  "Manor"  (Leet  Steward),  "Parish  Clerk,"  "School" 
(Usher). 

{d)  R.  V.  Montacute  (Lord),  1  W.  Blac.  61.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.), 
2  T.  R.  290.     S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  90,  n.  (A). 

(e)  Ante,  p.  12. 

(/)  1  W.  Blac.  62.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283,  supra,  n.  (f/),  and  see  post,  tit.  "  Writ" 
(Mandatory  Clause). 

{(j)   See    Stat.  12   Geo.  3,  c.  21,  s.  1,  and  see  R.  v.  Litchfield  (Ep.),  7  Mod. 

May,  1852.— 15 


226  tapping's    mandamtts. 

Notwithstanding  the  writ  issues  to  command  all  inferior  officers  to  do 
their  duty ;  yet  it  has  been  settled,  upon  the  authority  of  several  cases, 
that  the  Court  will  not  grant  the  writ  to  command  an  inferior  ministerial 
officer  to  execute  the  duties  of  his  office,  when  the  officer,  as  such  is  sub- 
ject to  another  authority,  by  whom  he  can  be  punished  for  his  neglect, 
and  with  whom  there  is  no  collusion.  Thus,  the  writ  does  not  lie  to  com- 
mand the  treasurer  of  a  county  to  obey  an  order  of  the  Court  of  Quarter 
Sessions,  both  because  he  is  the  mere  servant  of  such  sessions,  and  ame- 
nable to  them,  and  also  that  the  proper  remedy  in  such  case  is  by  indict- 
ment; and  Lord  Kenyon,  in  delivering  his  judgment,  remarked;  it  has 
been  often  said  by  Lord  Mansfield,  that  a  mandamus  is  a  very  beneficial 
writ,  and  that  the  best  method  of  preserving  it,  is  to  be  sparing  in  the 
use  of  it;"  and  added,  '^  that  the  Court  had  no  difficulty,  upon  a  proper 
case  laid  before  them,  in  granting  a  mandamus  to  justices  to  make  on  or- 
der, when  they  refuse  to  do  their  duty ;  but  it  would  be  descending  too 
low  to  grant  a  mandamus  to  their  officer  to  obey  that  order ;  and  that  the 
Court  might  as  well  issue  such  a  writ  to  a  constable,  or  other  ministerial 
officer,  to  compel  him  to  execute  a  warrant  directed  to  him."(/i) 

So  the  Court  of  B.  K.  will  not,  by  mandamus  command  other  inferior 
ministerial  officers  to  do  their  duties;  as  a  serjeant-at-mace;(i )  or  an 
apparitor ;(_/)  for  these  are  servants  to  their  respective  Courts,  and  pun- 
ishable by  the  Judges  of  them,  and  for  the  superior  Court  to  interpose  in 
obliging  such  inferior  officers,  would  be  to  usurp  the  authority  of  the  in- 
ferior Court  which  has  a  proper  jurisdiction  over  its  own  officers,  and 
which  alone  is  answerable  to  the  superior  Court  for  the  execution  of  such 
authority.  (A;) 

.]  De^mty  ;  Admission. — The  writ  will  not  be  granted  to  com- 
mand the  appointment  or  admission  of  a  deputy,  to  a  place  or  office  which 
cannot  be  exercised  by  deputy. (?)  But  if  there  be  a  legal  power  to  con- 
stitute a  deputy  in  such  a  case,  a  writ  will  be  granted  for  hindering  one 
who  may  ^lawfully  make,  in  making  a  deputy,  because  there  is 
L  -'no  other  remedy ;  but  to  such  a  writ  returns  of  "no  power  to 
make  deputy ;"  "  deputy  not  duly  appointed ;"  or  that  "  deputy  is  insuffi- 
cient," would  be  good.(m) 

218.  S.  C.  Kel.  287.  S.  C.  2  Barn.  365,  429.  See  infra,  "  Ministerial,"  and  post. 
tit,  "  Writ"  Mandatory  Clause.) 

{h)  Ante,  p.  12.  See  tits.  "Constable,"  "County,"  (Treasurer),  ante,  p.  103,  104; 
3  A.  &  E.  481,f  per  Littledale  J. ;  5  T.  R.  364.  R.  v.  Bristow,  6  T.  R.  168,  cited  in 
R.  v.Jeyes,  5N.&M.  103.f  S.  C.  3  A.  &E.416.t  R.  v.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  397.1  S.  C. 
1  N.  &  P.  524.t  R.  V.  Shaw,  5  T.  R.  549 ;  and  see  1  Chit.  650;  Bull.  N.  P.  195. 
See  supra,  "Judical." 

[i\  See  tits.  "  Serjeant  of  Mace."  {j)  See  tit.  "  Apparitor,"  p.  42. 

[k)  See  ante,  p.  112,  "  Common  Pleas  Officers,"  and  post,  p.  178.  R.  v.  Wilt- 
shire    anal,  5  N.  &  M.  349.f     Bac.   Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)     See  tit.  "  Proctor." 

(Z)  R.  T.  Gravesend  (Mayor),  4  D.  &  R.  Il7,t  and  3  A.  &  E.  776,f  as  to  when 
deputies  may  be  appointed.  R.  v.  Gravesend  (Mayor),  2  B.  &  C.  602. f  See  tits. 
"  Deputy  Officer,"  "  Marches,"  "  Recorder"  (Deputy,)  Registrar  of  Archbishop's 
Court,"  "Registrar  of  Bishop's  Court,"  infra,  "Admission,"  and  post,  p.  178, 
n.  (r). 

(m)  R.  V.  Win,  2  Keb.  738,  742,  743.    S.  C.  1  Lev.  306,  307.     S.  C.  1  Vent.  110, 


OFFICE.  227 

•]     Jlestoratton. — The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  restoration  of 

a  deputy  to  his  place,  if  illegally  deprived.  Thus,  if  an  office  be  granted 
to  A.  exerccndum  per  se  vel  sufficientem  dcputatum,  if  the  deputy  be  re- 
moved, a  mandamus  by  A.  lies  to  restore' his  deputy. (?i) 

.     Application. — The  writ  will  not,  however,  be  granted  on  the 

application  of  the  deputy  himself,  because  his  authority  is  revocable  at 
the  will  of  the  person  who  appointed  him,  but  will  be  granted  either  to 
admit  or  to  restore  such  deputy,  on  behalf  of  the  party  having  the  power 
of  appointing  such  deputy ;  for  his  freehold  is  concerned,  and  he  has  no 
other  remedy. (o) 

•]     Officers   of    Courts. — Officers   whose  offices  are   incident  to 

Courts  partake  of  the  nature  of  the  several  and  respective  Courts  for 
which  they  are  appointed,  and  which  they  attend,  and  the  Judges,  or 
those  who  have  the  supreme  authority  in  such  Courts,  are  the  proper  per- 
sons to  censure  any  misbehaviour;  and  should  they  be  mistaken,  the 
Court  of  B.  R.  cannot  relieve ;  for  in  all  cases  where  such  Judges,  &c. 
keep  within  their  bounds,  no  Court  can  correct  their  errors  in  proceed- 
ings, and  if  wrong  be  done,  the  party  injured  must  appeal. (j?) 

.]     Ecclesiastical. — The   Court  of  B.  R.   has  no  jurisdiction  to 

grant  mandamuses  in  respect  of  officers  purely  belonging  and  subject 
alone  to  the  Ecclesiastical  Court  5(5')  but  it  lies  in  some  instances  though 
the  office  be  subject  to  the  Ecclesiastical  Court,  and  notwithstanding  the 
officer  be  a  deputy  merely,  if  there  be  no  visitor. (r) 

.]     Sjyiritual  Officer. — The  Court  will  grant  a  writ  of  mandamus 

to  admit  or  restore  the  applicant  to  a  spiritual  office,  if  of  a  public  na- 
ture, and  for  which  there  is  not  a  legal  remedy,  (s)  Thus  it  has  been 
granted  to  induct  to  a  cathedral  stall. (<) 

* .]     3rd.  Election. — Wherever  a  political  necessity  exists, 

or  a  duty  be  shewn,  to  fill  up  a  municipal  or  other  office  by  elec-  ^         -I 

111.  Anon.  1  Barn.  252.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C. 
See  R.  V.  Roberts,  3  A.  &  E.  77G,t  and  tit.  "  Marches,"  &c. 

(«)  R.  V.  Marches  (President),  1  Lev.  30G,  307.  S.  C.  1  Vent.  110,  111,  supra. 
See  R.  V.  Roberts,  3  A.  &  E.  776,f  (as  to  when  a  deputj^  may  be  appointed).  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A).     See  tit.  "  Marches." 

(o)  Ante,  p.  18,  27.  R.  v.  Marches  (President),  1  Lev.  30G,  307.  S.  C.  2  Keb. 
738,  742.  S.  C.  1  Vent.  110,  111.  R.  v.  Dr.  Ward,  1  Barn.  295.  S.  C.  1  Barn. 
380,411,412.     S.  C.  Stra.  896.     See  tits.  "  Marches." 

{p)  See  ante,  p.  9,  21,  105;  3  Mod.  335,  supra;  1  Show.  263,  n.  {a),  supra; 
Carth.  170.  See  tits.  "Courts  Superior"  (Common  Pleas,)  "Proctor."  Supra,  p. 
177,  n.  (i)  (/). 

(q)  Ante,  p.  22.  R.  v.  Dr.  Ward,  Barn.  295.  R.  v.  Canterbury,  (Archbp.),  8 
East,  218.  R.  v.  Chester,  (Ep.).  1  W.  Blac.  24.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  206.  See  also  tits. 
"Apparitor,  &c."  "Proctor,"  "Registrar  of  Archbishop's  Court." 

(r)  R.  V.  Morpeth  (Bailiffs),  T.  3  Geo.  1,  Stra.  58.  R.  v.  Ward,  Stra.  897,  and 
cited  in  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  14.  S.  C.  Stra.  1192  ;  Sel.  N.  P.  1083,  11th 
edit.  And  see  tits.  "Apparitor  General,  &c.,"  "Prebendary,"  "Visitor."  Ante,  p. 
177,  n,  [I). 

Is)  Ante,  p.  12,  18—27.     Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  180.     See  supra,  (Public). 

\t)  See  tit.  "  Canon,"  "  Cathedral  Stall,"  "Prebendary."  Sir,  T.  Jon.  199.  R.  v. 
Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  542.     R.  v.  Morpeth  (Bailiffs),  Stra.  897 ;  3  Blac.  110. 


228  tapping's    mandamus. 

tion,  &c.,  the  Court  of  B.  K.  will  interfere,  by  mandamuSj  and  command 
it.(») 

.  Definite  Number. — Thus  it  is  clear  that  -uhcre,  by  act  of  Parlia- 
ment, letters  piitcnt,  charter,  or  prescription,  a  municipal  body  ought  to 
consist  of  a  deliuite  number,  and  they  neglect  to  fill  up  the  vacancies  as 
they  occur,  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  for  that  purpose. (v)  But 
it  does  not  lie  to  command  an  election  of  members  of  a  body,  the  number 
of  whom  is  indefinite ;  for  the  writ  issues  only  in  cases  of  necessity,  and 
to  supply  a  defect  of  justice.(«t')  Thus  where  a  charter  authorized  the 
mayor,  &.c.  of  a  corporation  from  time  to  time,  and  at  all  times  thereafter, 
as  often  and  when  to  them  should  seem  fit  and  necessary  to  nominate, 
choose  and  prefer,  so  many  and  such  persons  to  be  free  burgesses,  &c.,  as 
they  pleased ;  the  Court  of  B.  R.  refused  to  grant  a  mandamus  either  to 
proceed  to  the  election  of  free  burgesses,  or  to  command  the  holding  of  a 
meeting  for  the  purpose  of  considering  the  propriety  of  proceeding  to  such 
an  election,  in  order  to  fill  up  vacancies  in  the  aldermanic  body  and  the 
then  existing  body  of  free  burgesses  respectively ;  because  the  power  given 
to  the  corporation  was  purely  discretionary ;  it  being  clearly  settled,  that 
a  mandamus  does  not  lie  to  command  the  doing  of  that,  the  doing  or  omis- 
sion of  which  is  the  subject  of  pure  discretion. (x) 

It  seems  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has,  in  order  to  prevent  a  defect  of 
police  or  government,  exercised  a  common  law  jurisdiction,  and  issued  the 
writ  to  command  the  filling  up  of  vacancies  in  municipal  bodies,  occasioned 
otherwise  than  by  the  want  of  an  election  on  the  charter  day.  (3^)  So  also 
by  virtue  of  stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  s.  4,  the  Court  will  command,  if 
*-  -•  necessary,  an  ^election  of  the  annual  as  well  as  the  head  officer, 
and  all  the  necessary  constituent  parts  of  a  municipal  corporation. (^)   The 

(m)  Breedon  v.  Gill,  5  Mod.  275.  R.  v.  Robinson,  Stra.  555.  R.  t.  Fowey  (Mayor), 
4  D.  &  R.  138.f  S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  oST.f  And  see  stats.  9  Anne,  c.  20,  11  Geo.  1,  c. 
4,  5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  76,  and  1  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  26,  App.  Bull.  N.  P.  197,  and  cases  there 
cited;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) ;  3  Bl.  Com.  265  ;  3  Steph.  Com.  684.  See  tits. 
"Alderman"  (Election),  "Bailiff"  (Election),  "Burgess"  (Election),  "Chamber- 
lain" (Election),  "Churchwarden"  (Electiou),  "Corporation  Municipal"  (Duties, 
&c.),  "  Councillor"  (Election),  "  Guardians  of  Poor"  (Election),  "Jurats"  (Electiou), 
"Lectureship"  (Lecturer),  "Mayor"  (Election),  "Overseers"  (Election),  "Parish" 
(Officers,  Election),  "Parish  Clerk"  (Appointment),  "Portreeve"  (Election),  "  Pre- 
bendary" (Election),  "Recorder"  (Election),  "Sexton"  (Election),  "  Sidesman" 
(Election),  "  Town  Clerk"  (Election).     See  ante,  p.  9— 12. 

[v)  Ante,  p.  11,  37.  R.  v.  Fowey  (Mayor),  4  D.  &  R.  135.1  S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  587.1 
Bull.  N.  P.  201.     See  tits.  "Alderman"  (Election),  "Mayor"  (Election). 

(w)  Ante,  p.  10,  11 ;  2  B.  &  C.  587-1  S.  0.  4  D.  &  R.  132,t  supra.  R.  v.  Pate- 
man,  2  T.  R.  777  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  201.  No  case  can  be  found  to  the  contrary;  4  D.  & 
R.  137,t  per  Abbott,  C.  J.  See  5  D.  &  R.  G14.f  R.  v.  Eye  (Bailiffs),  2  D.  &  R.  172  ;t 
1  B.  &  C.  85  ;t  4  B.  &  A.  271  ;f  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)  See  tit.  "  Alderman" 
(Election),  "  Burgess." 

{x)  Ante,  p.  12,  13;  4  D.  &  R.  132.1  S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  587,t  supra.  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "  Man."  B.  1.  See  tit.  "Alderman"  (Election),  "Burgess"  (Free  Burgess,  Elec- 
tion). 

(y)  Ante,  p.  5.  R.  v.  Phippen,  7  A.  &  E.  968. f  See  stat.  9  Anne,  c.  20,  App. 
See  tits.  "Alderman"  (Election),  "  Capital  Burgess"  (Removal),  "  Mayor." 

(2)  See  stat.  App.,  and  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  (L),  App.  R.  v.  Maiden,  Burr. 
2132.     R.  v.  Woodrow,  2  T.  R.  732.     R.  v.  Oxford  (Corp.),  Cas.  t.  Hard.  177,  citiug 


OFFICE.  229 

Court  of  B.  R.  has  also  the  power  of  awarding  a  mandamus  by  virtue  of 
the  Stat.  7  Wm.  4  &  1  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  26,(«)  (extending  tlie  provisions  of 
Stat.  11  (}eo.  1,  c.  4,  which  has  been  held  to  apply  to  the  cases  hereafter 
mentioned,)  where  there  has  been  no  election,  or  the  election  was  void; 
but  not  where  the  party  is  supposed  to  have  forfeited  his  title  for  a  cause 
subsequent  to  the  election. (/>)  Thus  the  Court  will  command  a  corpora- 
tion to  go  to  an  election  of  a  corporate  officer,  in  the  stead  of  one  against 
whom  judgment  of  ouster  has  been  signed  j(c)  or  it  may  grant  the  writ  in 
the  first  instance,  without  waiting  for  such  ouster,  because  the  mandamus 
concludes  nothing ;  for  on  the  trial,  the  validity  of  the  elections  may  be 
gone  into.(«'/)  So  it  lies  to  proceed  to  an  election,  where  there  is  a  clause 
to  hold  over.(e) 

The  Court  will  also  grant  the  writ  to  proceed  to  an  election,  &c.,  where 
there  has  been  one  de  facto,  the  validity  of  which  is  disputed ;  the  office 
not  being  full  de  facto  of  either  party ;  in  order  that  the  title  of  the  con- 
tending parties  may  be  tried  on  the  return.  Thus,  where  two  persons 
claimed  to  have  been  legally  elected  to  the  office  of  recorder  of  a  borough, 
and  the  municipal  Court  had  certified  the  election  of  one  of  them  to  the 
Secretary  of  State,  for  the  approbation  of  the  Crown  ;  the  Court  of  B.  R. 
thought  it  a  proper  case  for  a  mandamus,  to  command  the  corporation  to 
put  the  corporate  seal  to  a  certificate  of  th3  election  of  the  other;  the  cer- 
tificate being  only  a  step  towards  the  completion  of  the  title,  the  Crown 
not  having,  at  the  time  of  the  motion,  signified  its  approbation  of  him 
whose  election  had  been  certified. (/)  But  the  writ  will,  in  such  cases, 
be  granted  only  to  elect  officers  in  the  stead  of  those  improperly  elected  ;(^) 
or  ousted  by  quo  warranto  ;(/i)  and  not  also  to  elect  others  in  the  p-j^-m-,-, 
room  of  those  duly  elected,  ^although  the  latter  were  elected  at  ■-  -■ 
the  same  time  with  those  so  improperly  elected.     Such  writ  will  also  be 

Bossiney's  case,  Stra.  1003.     R.  v.  Bridgenorth,  2  Chit.  256.     Scarborough's  case, 

Stra.  1180.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  (C.  2).     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)     R.  ^. 

Thetford  (Mayor),  8  East,  278.     See  the  titles  of  the  several  municipal  officers 

throughout  this  series,  and  also  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App. 
(a)  See  stat.  App. 

h)  R.  V.  Phippeu,  V  A.  &  E.  968.f     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.) 
(c)  R.  V.  West  Looe  (Corp.),  Burr.  1386,  1387.     R.  v.  Pindar,  8  Mod.  235.    S.  C. 

Stra.  582,  625,  627.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1447.     S.  C.  8  Mod.  332,  where  see  return 

of  an  ouster.     See  tit.  "  Mayor." 

((/)  R.  V.  Bridgewater  (Corp.),  3  Doug.  381  ;t  Sayer,  211 ;  Burr.   1454;  2  T.  R. 

259;  4  T.  R.  699;  6  East,  360.     See  tit.  "Peremptory  Writ"  (Effect), 
(p)  R.  V.  Helston  (Mayor),  Stra.  555.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.) 
(/)  3  Steph.  Com.  682.     R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  4  T.  R.  699.     R.  v.  Oxford  (.Mayor), 

6  A.  &  E.  353.f     R.  v.  Leeds  (Mayor),  11  A.  &  E.  512.t     See  stats.  11  Geo.  1,  c. 

4,  7  Wm.  4  &  1  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  24,  and  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  (I.),  App.  R.  v.  London 
(Mayor),  1  T.  R.  146.  R.  v.  Leyland,  3  M.  &  S.  184.  R.  v.  Norwich,  1  B.  &  Ad. 
SlO.f  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.  R.  v.  St.  Luke's,  2  X.  &  M.  464.t  Sec  tits. 
"Churchwarden"  (Admission),  "Councilman"  (Election),  "Mayor"  (Election). 

{g)  Ante,  p.  10.     R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  1  A.  &  E.  SO.f     See  tit.  "Vestry  (Holding). 
(A)  R.  V.  Pindar,  8  Mod.  235.     S.  C.  Stra.  582,  625,  627.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1447. 

5.  C.  8  Mod.  332,  334,  where  sec  a  return  of  ouster.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  1  Show. 
280.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  58 ;  6  Com.  Dig.  "  Quo  Warranto,"  (C.  5.)  See  ante,  tit. 
"Mayor"  (Election). 


280  tapping's    mandamus. 

granted  after  an  election  de  facto,  if  such  election  be  merely  colmiraUe, 
and  dcurli/  void,  and  in  some  cases  notwithstanding  the  office  may  be  full 
de  facto ;  for  the  words  "  no  election,"  in  the  stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  s.  2, 
mean  "no  due  legal  valid  election ;(i)  if,  however,  the  officer  be  actually 
sworn  in,  or  if  the  validity  of  the  election  be  merely  doubtful  or  question- 
able, the  Court  may  think  it  proper,  and  direct  that  the  right  of  the 
officer  de  facto  should  be  tried  first  by  a  quo  warranto  information ;  but  if 
it  be  clear  that  there  has  been  merely  a  colourable,  and  therefore  void 
election ;  the  officer  so  elected,  obtains  no  estate  in  the  office,  and  the 
Court  of  B.  11.  will  award  a  writ,  upon  the  above  statutes,  to  go  to  a  new 
election,  and  not  await  any  controversy  about  the  former  onejQ')  not- 
withstanding, as  before  stated,  such  wrongful  officer  may  be  in  posses- 
sion. (A-) 

The  law  upon  this  point  is  shortly  this  :  that  a  mandamus  will  be 
granted  to  elect  or  to  permit  an  exercise  of  office ;  but  not  to  restore, 
where  the  office  is  already  full  (de  facto),  by  what  is  called  a  void  election, 
although  the  office  be  such  that  the  right  to  it  cannot  be  tried  by  a  quo 
warranto  information ;  for  in  such  cases  the  Court  will,  if  they  be  satisfied 
that  the  election  is  void,  so  treat  it,  and  issue  a  mandamus  to  proceed  de 
novo;(r)  notwithstanding  the  applicant  may  claim  under  the  same  elec- 
tion with  the  officer  de  facto. (m)  So  if  two  or  more  applicants  shew  to 
the  Court  of  B.  R.  a  colouralle  title  only,  to  offices  not  the  subject  of  a 
quo  warranto  information,  such  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  to  each  or 
all  of  them,  in  order  to  give  them  an  opportunity  of  litigating  their 
rights,  and  will  not  decide  on  the  title,  on  shewing  cause  to  the  rule 
nisi.(re)     To  such  writs  a  return  oid^plenarty  is,  therefore,  bad.(o)     But 

(?)  See  such  act,  and  also  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  (I.),  App.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor), 
Burr.  2008,  per  Ld.  Mansfield,  C.  J.  Borough  of  Bossiney's  case,  Stra.  1002.  R. 
T.  Carmarthen  (Mayor),  or  R.  v.  Newsham,  Say.  211.  R.  v.  Bankes,  Burr.  1454. 
R.  V.  Colchester  (Mayor),  4  Doug.  14.t  R.  v.  Land  Tax  Commissioners,  3  T.  R. 
149.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)  See  tits.  "Councilman"  (Election),  "Mayor" 
(Election). 

ij)  Case  of  Aberystwith,  Stra.  115Y,  and  see  Stra.  1003,  1180. 

\k\  Scarborough's  case,  Stra.  1180.     See  tit.  "Mayor"  (Election). 

(I)  Ante,  p.  26,  27.  R.  v.  Stoke  Damerel,  5  A.  &  E.  584  ;t  2  H.  &  W.  346.  S. 
C.  1  N.  &  P.  60,f  per  Patteson,  J.,  citing  1  East,  79,  supra;  Burr.  1454.  S.  C.  1 
W  Blac  444,  451 ;  Burr.  2008.  Bossiney's  case,  Stra.  1003 ;  2  T.  R.  259,  and  7 
A.  &  E.  254,  supra.  R.  v.  Bedford  Level  (Corp.),  6  East,  356.  Ex  parte  Thatcher, 
1  D  &  R.  426.t  R.  V.  Land  Tax  Commissioners,  1  T.  R.  146.  See  also  R.  t.  Exe- 
ter (Chapter)  12  A.  &  E.  527-1  R.  v.  Shepherd,  4  T.  R.  381.  R.  v.  Davie,  6  A.  & 
E.  386  ;t  7  A.  &  E.  254,t  and  see  cases  1  N.  &  P.  474.t  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  349  jf  3 
A.  &  e!  467.+     See  tit.  "Mayor"  (Election). 

[m)  Ante,  p.  180  ;  2  T.  R.  259.    R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  1265.    Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man." 

f  B  ^ 

[n)  R  V.  Middlesex  (Archdeacon),  3  A.  &  E.  eiC.f  R.  v.  Birmingham  (Rector), 
7  A.  &  E.  25C.t  R.  V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  80,  84  ;  6  East,  356.  See  tit. 
"Churchwarden"  (Election).     See  post,  tits.  "Application,"  "Rule." 

(o)  Co  Litt  344,  b.  R.  v.  Ward,  Fitzg.  195.  Boswell's  case,  6  Rep.  48,  b.  R. 
V.  Exeter  (Chapter),  12  A.  &  E.  526,  SSO.f  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  Burr.  2008. 
See  R.  V.  Bedford  Level,  6  East,  356.  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  1  A.  &  E.  SO.f  R.  v.  Bir- 
mingham (Rector),  7  A.  &  E.  258.t  And  see  R.  v.  Shepherd,  4  T.  R.  381.  bee 
post,  tit.  "  Return." 


OFFICE.  231 

it  has  been  held  to  be  a  good  return  to  such  a  writ,  *that  there 
has  been  an  election,  thereby  meaning  a  valid  election. (p)     So  is  L 
a  return  of  non  fuit  electus.(5') 

But  if  a  candidate  have  been  rejected  or  ousted  of  an  office  by  the  elec- 
tion of  another  person  to  that  office,  such  election  not  being  merely  colour- 
able, but  prima  facie  good,  or  even  doubtful,  and  the  right  to  such  office 
can  be  tried  by  an  information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto,  he  must 
take  such  remedy  against  the  party  holding  the  office  de  facto,  for  in  such 
a  case,  a  mandamus  will  not  be  granted,  it  not  being  the  proper  process 
for  ousting  an  usurper,  (r)  For  the  writ  as  before  stated  is  not  gran  table 
where  there  is  another  specific  legal  remedy  by  quo  warranto  informa- 
tion, (s)  So  that  to  a  mandamus  founded  upon  such  facts,  a  return  of  a 
plenai-ty  \^  goo^.Q) 

Where  the  mandamus  is  sought  for  to  fill  up  an  office,  on  the  ground 
that  the  election  to  it  is  a  nullity,  such  nullity  must  be  very  clearly  made 
out.(z<)  Thus  where  it  appeared  by  affidavit,  that  one  of  two  candidates 
for  an  office  had  a  majority  only  by  means  of  illegal  votes,  the  Court 
granted  the  writ  to  admit  and  swear  the  other  who  appeared  upon  the 
affidavits  to  have  the  greater  number  of  legal  votes,  and  this  although  the 
former  was  admittted  and  sworn  into  the  office,  there  being  no  other  spe- 
cific, or  at  least  no  other  such  convenient  mode  of  trying  the  right. (*;) 

But  where  an  office  is  full  by  the  appointment  of  the  person  who  prima 
facie,  or  ordinarily  has  the  right  of  appointment,  and  where  there  are 
means  of  trying  the  title  by  action,  as  by  refusing  to  pay  the  fees,  &c., 
the  Court  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  against  the  party  filling  the  office  in 
order  to  try  the  title,  especially  where  it  is  doubtful,  whether  or  not  an 
information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto  will  lie  for  the  usurpation  of 
such  office.  (?c)  So,  that  the  prosecutor  must  make  out  a  very  strong 
claim  before  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  in  such  case.(ic)     But  if 

{p)  R.  V.  Williams,  Say.  140. 

(q)  Ante,  p.  72.     R.  v.  Ward,  Fitzg.  195. 

(r)  Ante,  p.  26,  27.  R.  v.  Stoke  Damerel,  5  A.  &  E.  589.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  SG.f 
R.  V.  Oxford  (Mayor),  1  N.  &  P.  474.t  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  349.1  R.  v.  Davie,  6  A.  & 
E.  38G.  Ex  parte  Thatcher,  1  D.  &  R.  426.t  R.  v.  Beedle,  3  A.  &  E.  467,1  con- 
firming R.  T.  York  (Mayor),  4  T.  R.  699.  R.  v.  Colchester  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  259. 
R.  V.  Bedford  (Corp.),  1  East,  79.  R.  v.  Bedford  Level,  6  East,  356.  R.  v.  Bir- 
mingham (Rector),  7  A.  &  E.  255.f  Bossiney's  case,  Stra.  1003.  R.  v.  Bankes, 
Burr.  1454.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  444,  451,  where  see  form  of  rule.  R.  v.  Cambridge 
(Mayor),  Burr.  2008.  R.  v.  Chester  (Mayor),  1  M.  &  S.  101.  R.  v.  Attwood,  4  B. 
&  Ad.  482,t  and  cases  there  cited.  R.  v.  Exeter  (Chapter),  12  A.  &  E.  526,  530.f 
R.  V.  Williams,  Say.  140  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (C.)  See  tits.  "  Councillor"  (Elec- 
tion), "  Mayor"  (Election). 

(s)  Ante,  p.  26,  27.  R.  v.  Bedford  Level,  6  East,  358  ;  3  A.  &  E.  460,  473,t  supra. 
R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396. 

(0  Co.  Litt.  344  b.;  6  Rep.  48  b.  R.  v.  Bankes,  H.,  4  Geo.  3,  Burr.  1452  ;  12  A. 
&  E.  526,  530,1  supra;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.)  As  to  what  is  a  plenarty,  see 
11  A.  &  E.  512.f     See  ante,  p.  181,  n.  (o). 

(u)  6  A.  &  E.  386,t  supra. 

(v)  Ante,  p.  18  ;  6  East,  356,  supra ;  2  Smith,  535.    See  post,  tit.  "  Application. 

\w)  Ante,  p.  20,  24,  26,  27.  R.  v.  Stoke  Damerel  (Minister),  1  N.  &  P.  56.f  S. 
C.  5  A.  &  E.  584.t     S.  C.  2  Har.  &  W.  346. 

{%)  1  N.  &  P.  58.f     See  tit.  "  Application." 


232  tapping's    mandamus. 

r*l  8^1  *^^  °®^^  ^^  ^"^^  ^-^  ^^  ^appointment  clearly  made  without  any 
L  -I  authority,  the  writ  will  be  granted,  though  generally  a  plenarty 
is  an  objection  to  such  a  proceeding. (,y) 

So  the  Court  will  refuse  such  a  writ  when  applied  for,  in  order  to  raise 
a  question  against  usage,  as  whether  the  election  of  certain  municipal 
officers  ought  or  ought  not  to  be  annual;  although,  such  usage  be  clearly 
contrary  to  the  words  of  the  charter,  if  ihcre  be  another  remedy  open  to 
the  applicants  or  where  the  words  or  construction  of  such  charter,  are  in 
any  degree  doubtful.  Thus  where  a  charter  of  incorporation  of  Hen.  7, 
granted  to  the  citizens  and  commonalty  in  these  words,  "  volumus  etiam 
damns  et  concedimus  pro  nobis  et  heredibus  nostris,  praefatis  civibus  et 
communitati  heredibus  et  successoribus  suis :  quod  ipsi  et  successores  in 
perpetuum  singulis  annis  successivis  viginti  quartuor  concives  civitatis 
praedictae  in  aldermannos,  nee  non  quadraginta  alios  cives  ejusdem  civitatis 
pro  communi  consilio  civitatis  illius  eligere  facere  et  creare  possint."  It 
appeared  that  in  1693,  and  the  two  following  years,  successive  elections 
of  the  forty  common  councilmen  had  been  made ;  since  which  time  the 
usage  had  been  not  to  elect  the  aldermen  or  councilmen  annually  5(2)  the 
Court  refused  a  writ  of  mandamus,  which  was  applied  for  in  order  to  raise 
a  question  against  such  usage. 

So,  if  a  peremptoi'y  writ  be  granted  for  one,  there  can  be  no  mandamus 
for  another  until  the  election  has  been  tried,  upon  the  pretence  that  the 
latter  was  well  elected  and  the  former  mandamus  gained  by  artifice. (a) 

Where  an  election  is  incomplete,  or  irregularly  conducted,  the  writ  lies 
to  command  an  entry  of  an  adjournment  of  an  election  meeting,  and  to 
proceed  to  complete  the  election. (6)  But  the  Court  will  not  grant  a  man- 
damus to  summon  the  individual  persons  who  were  summoned  for  a  jury 
on  a  former  day  to  proceed  to  election. (c)  So,  the  writ  also  lies  to  com- 
mand municipal  officers  to  proceed  in  a  scrutiny  of  the  poll  in  the  election 
of  their  corporate  members. (rf) 

There  is  no  precedent,  in  the  case  of  an  election,  of  a  mandamus  having 
been  granted  to  command  a  returning  officer  to  make  a  new  return,  (e) 

.     Notice  of  Ajyplication,  &c. — By  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  s.  5, 

ten  days'  notice  in  writing  should  be  given  of  the  intended  application(/) 

{y)  Ante,  p.  181,  n.  (0)  ;  5  A.  &  E.  586,f  supra ;  R.  v.  Colchester  (Mayor),  2  T. 
R.  259,  and  see  R.  v.  Bedford  Level,  6  East,  536. 

(z)  Ante,  p.  18—27.  R.  v.  Chester  (Major),  1  M.  &  S.  101.  R.  v.  Attwood,  4 
B.  &  Ad.  482,  483,  495.t  R.  v.  Salway,  9  B.  &  C.  432,  435  ;t  Stra.  1180.  See  tits. 
"  Custom,"  "  Manor"  (Custom,  License).     See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

{a)  2  Jon.  215  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  '•  Man."  (B.)  See  post,  tit.  "  Writ"  (Concurrent), 
"  Peremptory'  Writ." 

lb)  R.  v.  St.  Luke's  (Vestrymen),  2  N.  &  M.  464.f     See  tit.  "  Vestry." 

(c)  R.  V.  Bankes,  Burr.  1452.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  452 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.) 
See  tit.  "  Jury." 

(d)  R.  V.  Everet,  Cas.  temp.  Hard.  261. 

(e)  R.  T.  Heathcote,  10  Mod.  49,  54.     But  see  tit.  "  Alderman"  (Election). 

(/)  See  Stat.  App.  In  cases  of  the  election  to  corporate  offices,  it  is  well  to  fol- 
low that  statute  strictly.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12  (L) ;  9  &  10 
Vict.  c.  13  (I.),  n.  (a).     See  post,  tit.  "Application"  (Notice). 


OFFICE.  233 

to  the  Court  for  a  writ  to  proceed  to  the  election  of  any  corporate  officer 
of  a  *borough  in  England  or  Wales.  A  burgess  had  been  held  r*i  gj^-i 
not  to  be  a  corporate  officer  within  the  above  statute.  (,9) 

.  Affidavits  and  statement  of  grounds  of  motion,  see  Require- 
ments of  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App. 

.  Application  ;  Priority  of  Motion.  Where  a  defendant  is  oust- 
ed on  a  quo  warranto,  the  prosecutor  of  such  information  is  entitled  to 
priority  of  motion  for  mandamus  for  a  new  election,  if  he  apply  within  a 
reasonable  time,  if  he  do  not  do  so,  then,  and  not  before,  the  defendant  is 
entitled  to  move  for  it;(/0  if,  however,  the  prosecutor  be  quite  prepared 
to  move,  and  only  stay  till  his  judgment  of  ouster  be  signed,  he  docs  not 
thereby  lose  his  priority  of  motion,  nor  if  another  person,  in  order  to  get 
priority,  employ  a  counsel,  who  has  pre-audience  of  the  prosecutor's  coun- 
sel, (i) 

The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not,  either  in  municipal  or  in  such  parish,  on 
a  motion  for  a  mandamus  to  elect,  &c.,  investigate  the  title  of  electors, 
who  have  for  some  time  exercised  their  office,  especially  when  objections 
are  taken  to  the  title  of  each  individual. (J) 

Since  the  stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  for  obliging  municipal  corporations  to 
elect  officers,  it  has  been  held,  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  a  discretionary 
power  to  refuse  a  writ  for  that  purpose,  and  that  it  will  first  receive  infor- 
mation as  to  the  election,  and  if  dissatisfied  about  the  right,  will  send  the 
parties  to  try  it  on  a  quo  warranto  information. (/.-) 

In  all  eases  within  the  stat.  6  &  7  Vict,  c,  89,  which  applies  to  the 
ejection  of  municipal  officers,  it  is  enacted,  that  the  defendant  may  shew 
cause  in  the  first  instance  against  such  application,  and  if  no  sufficient 
cause  be  shewn,  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Court  of  B.  R.  on  proof  of 
due  service  of  such  notice  and  statement,  and  of  the  delivery  of  a  copy  of 
the  affidavits,  to  make  the  rule  for  such  mandamus  absolute,  if  the  said 
Court  shall  think  fit  in  the  first  instance. (^ 

.     Rule. — As  to  the  rule  in   cases   of  the  election  of  municipal 

officers,  it  is  by  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89, (m)  enacted,  that  the  Court  may, 
if  it  shall  so  think  fit,  make  the  rule  for  such  mandamus  absolute  in  the 
first  instance,  or  direct  that  any  writ  of  mandamus  thereby  ordered  to  be 
issued,  shall  be  peremptory  in  the  first  instance. 

If  the  Court  have  proposed  to  try  an  election  by  a  feigned  issue,  or  to 
proceed  to  a  new  election,  and  if  one  party  refuse  it,  the  Court  will  insert 
such  refusal  in  the  rule,  that  it  may  appear  authentically  to  the  jury  on 

{g)  Ke  Milner,  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  M.  C.  186.     See  tit.  "  Burgess." 

{h)  R.  V.  McKay,  4  B.  &  C.  658-1  R.  v.  West  Looe  (Corp.),  Burr.  138G.  R.  v. 
Wigan  (Corp.),  Burr.  782.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application"  (Motion). 

(i)  See  note  (/*),  supra. 

(y)  R.  V.  Dolgelly  Union,  8  A.  &  E.  561.f  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  542.  In  re  Aston 
Union,  6  A.  &  E.  784.f  R.  v.  Ramsden,  3  A.  &  E.  456.f  See  post,  tit.  "  Applica- 
tion."    As  to  Municipal  Elections,  see  stat.  1  Vict.  c.  '78,  s.  1,  App. 

(A-)  Ante,  p.  13—15,  26,  27.  R.  v.  Tintagel  (Mayor),  Stra.  1003,  1157;  Andr. 
280  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (E.) 

(I)  See  stat.  App.  (m)  See  stat.  App. 


234  tapping's    mandamus. 

the  trial. (»)     The  rule  to  elect  should  be  ''to  proceed  to  an  election  and 
*not  to  elect  a  particular  person. "(o)     The  Court  will  not  order  a 
L  looj  ^|_^y  ^^^,  ^jj^  election  to  be  inserted  in  the  rule,  but  will  leave  that 
to  the  proper  officer,  (j;) 

.    Writ,  Form  of. — The  writ,  in  form,  is  to  proceed  to  an  election 

to  the  office  generally,  and  not  to  elect  a  particular  person  ',(q)  for  the 
Court  of  B.  R.  has  no  power  to  command  the  election  of  a  particular  per- 
son, unless  such  person  be  by  act  of  Parliament  or  otherwise  specially 
named  as  the  person  to  be  elected. (r) 

The  Court  will  not  fix  the  day  for  the  election,  in  order  that  it  may  be 
inserted  in  the  writ;(s)  for  the  Court  will  leave  that  for  the  proper  officer, 
and  if  he  do  wrong,  application  should  be  made  to  the  Court.  (<) 

].     4th.  Admission. — The  writ  lies  to  command  admission  to  the 

exercise  of  the  duties  of  an  office,  if  the  applicant  be  duly  entitled ;(«) 
as  to  the  office  of  a  common  councilman,  &c.(w)  But  if  there  be  a  custom 
that  no  person  shall  bo  elected  to  or  serve  an  office  for  more  than  two 
years  successively,  the  Court  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  to  admit  a  per- 
son who  has  been  elected  to  serve  for  a  third  or  fourth  year.(M;)  So  where 
there  is  an  ascertained  defect  in  the  title  of  him  who  applies  for  admis- 
sion to  an  office,  the  Court  will  not  admit  him,  for  he  may  be  ousted  im- 
mediately, (a) 

But  the  writ  will  be  granted,  although  the  applicant  may  have  never 
had  possession  of  his  office ;  for  if  he  have  had  possession,  and  be  ousted, 
then  the  writ  must  be  "  to  restore,  &c."(y)  It  is  not,  however,  a  ground 
for  refusing  a  mandamus  to  admit  a  party  to  an  office  to  which  he  has 
been  elected,  that  to  a  similar  mandamus,  granted  in  respect  of  a  former 
election  of  the  same  party,  a  return  was  made  shewing  an  excuse,  valid 
in  point  of  law,  for  not  admitting  him,  for  he  may  have  gained  a  qualifi- 

{n)  R.  V.  Barker,  Burr.  1265;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.).  See  tit.  "Feigned 
Issue'' 

(o)' Shuttleworth  v.  London  (City),  2  Buls.  122;  2  Roll.  456;  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."  C.  2.     See  post,  tit.  "Writ"  (Mandatory  Clause.) 

(p)  Ante,  p.  38,  n.  (v). 

\q)  2  Bulst.  122  ;  2  Roll.  456.     See  post.  tit.  "  Writ"  (Form). 

(r)  Roll.  Abr.  tit.  "  Restitution,"  5.  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Church- 
wardens." 

(s)  Ante,  p.  38,  n.  (y).  Borough  of  Evesham's  case,  Stra.  949;  Anon.  2  Barn. 
236 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  2. 

(t)  R.  V.  Bridgenorth  (Mayor),  2  Chit.  256.f     See  tit.  "  Burgess." 

{u)  Ante,  p.  12,  27,  28.  R.  v.  Gloucester  (Ep.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  ISB.f  R.  v.  Dol- 
gelly  (Union),  8  A.  &  E.  562.t 

(v)  R.  V.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  539,  per  Eyre,  J.  And  see  the  several  titles 
throughout  this  work,  supra,  p.  179,  n,  (m). 

[xv)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  1  T.  R.  423  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man." 
(B.)      See  tit.  "  Custom." 

(x)  Ante,  p.  27,  28 ;  3  B.  &  Ad.  264  ;f  1  T.  R.  423,  supra.  See  tit.  "Burgess" 
(Admission,  &c.) 

(y)  Ante,  p.  80.  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Comb.  238.  S.  C.  Holt,  437.  S.  C.  4 
Mod.  368  ;  Anon.  Sti.  299  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  See  infra,  "  Restoration," 
and  tits.  "Alderman"  (Admission),  "Burgess"  (Admission),  "Churchwarden"  (Ad- 
mission). 


OFFICE.  235 

cation  subsequently. (s)  Nor  is  it  a  good  return  to  such  a  Avrit  that  the 
ofHcc  is  full,  for  a  mandamus  gives  no  right,  but  only  a  possession,  in  order 
to  try  the  right. («)  But  it  is  a  good  return  that  the  prosecutor  has  refused 
to  be  admitted. (i) 

* .     Application. — The  Court  will  more  readily  grant  an 

application  to  admit  than  one  to  restore.  The  former  is  conceded  '-  -' 
in  most  cases,  in  order  to  enable  the  applicant  to  try  his  right,  without 
which  he  would  be  deprived  of  all  legal  remedy. (r)  The  applicant  must, 
however,  make  out  a  prima  facie  right  to  the  office,  the  nature  of  which 
must  be  shewn  j(rc)  and  shew  at  least  that  he  has  complied  with  all  the 
forms  necessary  to  constitute  that  right. (^/)  Thus  a  mere  statement  by 
applicant  that  he  apposes  he  was  elected  for  life,  is  not  sufficient;  he  must 
shew  the  grounds  for  it.(e) 

.     Affidavits. — The  Court  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  to  admit  to 

an  office  not  known  to  the  law,  unless  the  nature  of  it  be  specially  stated, 
in  order  that  the  Court  may  see  that  it  is  such  an  one  for  which  the  writ 
lics.(/)  And  it  is  not  sufficient  that  the  affidavit  positively  states  that 
the  office  is  a  public  one,  for  it  should  proceed  to  show  how  it  is  so,  by 
specifically  alleging  the  nature  of  the  duties ;((/)  but  although  some  of  the 
circumstances  stated  may  seem  to  shew  the  office  to  be  a  private  one,  yet, 
if  the  affidavits  which  state  it  to  be  a  public  one  arc  not  denied,  the  Court 
will  and  ought  to  grant  the  writ,  as  they  will  be  better  able  to  judge  of 
the  matter  on  the  return. (^) 

The  affidavits  must  also  positively  shew  the  fact  of  election. (/')  Thus 
in  a  case  where  it  was  merely  alleged  that  he  (the  prosecutor)  had  lcc7i  in- 
formed that  he  had  been  elected,  the  Court  refused  the  rule ;  but  ultimately, 
there  being  an  affidavit  of  an  application  and  refusal  to  allow  inspection 
of  the  Court  books,  granted  the  rule.(j) 

(z)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  1  N.  &  M.  285.f  S.  C.  3  B.  &  Ad. 
255.+     See  post,  p.  188,  n.  [x). 

(a)  Ante,  p.  181.  R.  v.  Ward,  Stra.  893.  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  57.  S.  C. 
1  Wils.  266.  See  supra,  "Election,"  as  to  difference  between  offices  which  are 
and  are  not  the  subjects  of  quo  warranto.  See  post,  tit.  "  Peremptory  Writ" 
(Effect). 

(b)  R.  T.  Jorden,  9  Geo.  2,  Bull.  N.  P.  201.     See  post,  192,  n.  (/),  (,</). 

(c)  R.  V.  Jotham,  3  T.  R.  578;  1  W.  Blac.  25,  n.  (o),  2nd  edit.;  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."  (A.)     Infra,  "  Restoration,"  and  post,  tit.  "Application." 

(cc)  Anon.,  6  Mod.  316.     See  supra,  "Election."     Ante,  p.  27,  28. 

(d)  Ante,  p.  27,  28  ;  3  T.  R.  575 ;  3  B.  &  Ad.  264,f  supra. 

(e)  3  T.  R.  578,  supra. 

(/)  Ante,  p.  174.  Anon.,  6  Mod.  316,  and  cited  in  R.  v.  London  (Mayor  of),  2 
T.  R.  179  ;  3  B.  &  Ad.  264  ;f  4  Com.  Dig.  209.  Schriven  and  Turner's  case,  Stra. 
832  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (C.) 

{ff)  Anon.,  1  Barn.  153.     See  tit.  "  Ashburton"  (Eight  Men  of). 

(//)  Ante,  p.  173.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  182,  n.  (/;).  R.  v.  Dr.  "Ward, 
Fitzg.  123. 

(«■)  Bull.  N.  P.  200.  R.  v.  Harewood,  2  East,  177,  and  see  2  ]\[od.  316  ;  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (C.) 

[j]  Ante,  p.  118,  n.  (v) ;  3  T.  R.  578.  R.  v.  Vintners'  Company,  Bull.  N.  P.  200. 
See  tit.  post,  "  Application"  (Affidavits). 


236  tapping's    mandamus. 

.     Rvh. — The  rule  for  a  writ  to  admit,  will,  in  case  the  right 

appear  plain,  be  granted  absolute  in  the  first  instance. (A-) 

.     Writ,  Form  of. — The  office  must  be  properly  described  in  the 

writ,  or  the  variance  will  be  fatal. (/) 

.     Return  ;   Traverses. — The  return  may  traverse  all  or  any  of  the 

traversable  allegations  contained  in  the  writ. 

.     Incapax  ;  Not  Qualified,  &r. — But  it  has  been  held  not  to  be 

a  good  return  to  state  that  the  defendant  was  "  inrajtaUe"  of  being,  or 
'^  not  qualified"  to  be  elected  ;  for  the  proper  way  to  try  such  points  is  by 
an  information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto. (m) 

r*l  ^7^      * •     ^^"  ^^^'^  Electus. — It  has  been  held,  that  to  a  man- 

damns  to  admit  to  an  office,  containing  a  suggestion  of  due  elec- 
tion, a  traverse  of  such  suggestion,  is  a  good  and  sufficient  answer,  and  a 
proper  way  of  putting  in  issue  the  title  of  the  applicant  j  for  it  may  be  that 
the  application  for  the  mandamus  is  made  by  a  perfect  stranger,  and  there 
must  be  some  general  way  of  traversing  the  title  he  sets  up.(?i)  And 
such  a  traverse  is  good,  notwithstanding  it  does  not  show  wherein  an 
election,  if  one  were  had,  was  rendered  void,  &c.(o) 

.  Condition  Precedent;  Oaths. — So,  if  the  taking  of  certain  sta- 
tutory oaths  are  a  condition  precedent  to  admission,  the  omission  so  to  do 
will  form  a  good  return ;  but  a  return  which  merely  stated  that  the  pro- 
secutor had  not  taken  the  oaths  before  a  mayor  according  to  the  stat.  13 
Car.  2,  c.  1,  was  held  to  be  bad  for  uncertaity,  as  he  might  have  taken 
them  before  two  justices :  but  as  to  an  officer  who  is  bound  to  take  the 
oaths,  it  is  no  excuse  that  they  were  not  tendered  to  him.(p) 

By  the  subsequent  statute,  1  Wm.  &  M.  sess,  1,  c.  8,  every  person  hav- 
ing an  office  was  bound  to  take  certain  oaths.  (5)  It  has,  however,  been 
held  under  such  last  mentioned  statute,  that  a  judgment  given  against  a 

[k)  Bull.  N.  P.  See  Mayor  of  Truro,  M.  1816;  2  Chit.  257-1  R.  v.  Coventry 
(Mayor),  3  Doug.  236.     See  post,  "Rule." 

U)  Ante,  p.  175.  R.  v.  Ipswich  (Bailiffs),  2  Salk.  434.  R.  v.  Dartmouth 
Mayor),  3  Salk.  229.  See  tit.  "  Ashburton"  (Eight  Men  of).  See  post,  tit.  "  Writ" 
Form  of). 

[m)  R.  V.  Doncaster,  Say.  40  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (I.)  These  returns  apply 
to  those  offices  only  a  right  to  which  cannot  be  tried  by  quo  warranto.  See  supra, 
"  Election,"  and  infra,  "  Restoration"  (Return).  See  tit.  "  Churchwarden"  (Swear- 
ing in,  Incapax). 

(«)  Cas.  t.  Hard.  130,  n.  (1).  R.  v.  Dr.  Harris,  1  W.  Blac.  430.  S.  C.  Burr. 
1420,  1422.  R.  V.  Harwood,  Ld.  Raym.  1405,  overruling  R.  v.  Sympson,  M.,  11 
Geo.  1.  R.  V.  Dr.  Ward,  1  Barn.  381,  412  ;  Fitzg.  195.  R.  v.  Twitty,  2  Salk.  433. 
R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  66,  72.  R.  v.  Cornwall  (Mayor),  11  Mod.  174.  R.  v. 
Guise,  3  Salk.  88.  S.  C.  6  Mod.  189.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1008.  R.  v.  Dover 
(Mayor),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  101,  M.  C.  R.  v.  New  Windsor  (Mayor),  14  L.  J.,  N.  S., 
319,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Harwich  (Mayor),  8  A.  &  E.  919.t  S.  C.  8  L.  J.,  N.  S.  13,  Q.  B. ; 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (G.)  See  tit.  "Churchwarden"  (Swearing  in.  Return,  Tra- 
verse, Non  fuit  Electus). 

(0)  R.  V.  York  (Sheriff).  2  Show.  154;  Fitzg.  195.    See  post,  tit.  "Return." 

(»)  R.  V.  Slatford,  5  Mod.  316.  S.  C.  2  Jones,  121.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  428.  S.  C. 
Comb.  419.  S.  C.  Holt,  438  ;  1  Hawk.  P.  C.  ch.  8,  s.  1.  R.  v.  Sanchar,  2  Show. 
66,  n.  (rt) ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Franchise"  (F.  29).  See  tit.  "College"  (Oaths).  See 
post,  tit.  "  Return." 

[q)  R.  V.  Exon  (Mayor),  1  Show.  258.     R.  v.  London  (City),  1  Show.  240. 


OFFICE.  237 

city,  "  that  the  liberties  thereof  be  seized  into  the  King's  hands/'  neither 
dissolved  the  corporation,  nor  amoved  the  members  thereof  from  their  cor- 
porate offices  ;  and  therefore,  if  an  alderman  of  the  city,  after  such  statute, 
(which  enacts,  "  that  if  any  person  now  having  any  office,  shall  neglect  to 
take  the  oaths  therein  prescribed,  before  the  first  of  August  next  ensuing, 
or  sooner  if  required  by  the  Privy  Council,  the  said  office  shall  be  void,") 
neglected  to  take  the  said  oaths  within  the  time  mentioned,  it  was  a  for- 
feiture of  his  office,  to  which  he  was  not  restored  by  the  stat.  of  2  Wm.  & 
M.  St.  1,  c.  8,  s.  7,  (which  enacts,  "that  all  officers  of  the  said  city  who 
rightly  held  any  office  therein  at  the  time  the  said  judgment  was  given, 
shall  be  confirmed  in,  and  have  and  enjoy  the  same  as  fully  as  they  held 
them  at  the  time  the  said  judgment  was  given,  except  such  as  have  been 
removed  for  any  just  cause. ")(?•)  So,  *that  if  any  officer  omitted  r*jgg-| 
to  take  them,  and  subscribe  the  declaration  at  the  time  of  his  tak- 
ing the  oath  of  office,  his  election  to  such  office  became  absolutely  void, 
although  the  oaths  or  declaration  were  not  tendered  to  him,  therefore,  an 
omission  to  do  so,  constituted  a  good  return. (,s) 

But  now  by  Stat.  5  Geo.  1,  c.  6,  it  is  enacted,  that  all  persons  required 
to  take  such  oath  or  subscribe  such  declaration,  shall  be  confirmed  in  their 
respective  offices,  and  be  free  from  all  incapacities  and  penalties,  and  none 
of  their  acts  be  questioned,  notwithstanding  their  omission  to  take  such 
oaths  or  subscribe  the  declarations,  &c.,  nor  shall  they  be  amoved  by  the 
corporation,  or  otherwise  prosecuted  for  having  omitted  to  take  the  Sacra- 
ment within  one  year  next  before  their  election,  unless  such  removal  or 
prosecution  be  commenced  within  six  months  after  the  election,  and  there- 
fore, if  neither  removal  nor  prosecution  take  place  within  the  time  limited, 
the  election  becomes  absolute  and  unavoidable.  (<) 

Subsequent  statutes  have  in  some  cases  mitigated  the  penalties  on  omis- 
sion to  take  the  oaths,  and  in  other  cases  abolished  them  altogether. 

.]  5th.  Swearing  in. — The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  swear- 
ing in  to  an  office,(«)  if  the  prosecutor  be  duly  entitled  to  be  sworn  in. 
Thus,  if  an  officer  attend  a  magistrate  to  be  sworn,  and  he  be  refused  ;  the 
writ  will  be  granted,  because  if  the  law  were  otherwise,  it  would  be  in  the 
power  of  the  magistrate  to  elude  the  act,(w)  and  the  writ  will  be  granted 
notwithstanding  the  officer  may  execute  his  office  before  he  is  sworn. (if) 

(r)  Smith's  case,  4  Mod.  53.  S.  C.  1  Show.  263,  274.  S.  C.  Carth.  217.  S.  C. 
Skin.  293,  310.     S.  C.  Holt,  168,  310.     S.  C.  12  Mod.  17.     Sec  tit.  "  Oaths." 

(s)  R.  V.  Sanchar,  2  Show.  66.  R.  v.  Morpeth  (Bailiff),  Stra.  58.  See  Jones's 
Rep.  2  Jones,  121.  R.  v.  Thatcher,  Trcm.  517—523;  4  Mod.  34,  n  (b),  and  see 
stats.  1  W.  &  M.  s.  1,  c.  8,  s.  6,  and  2  W.  &  M.  c.  8,  s.  12,  supra,  p.  187. 

(/)  Crawford  v.  Powell,  Burr.  1013.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  229.  See  also  R.  v.  Mon- 
day, Cowp.  539 ;  25  Car.  2,  c.  2  ;  1  Geo.  1,  st.  2,  c.  13;  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  s.  4,  and 
31  Geo.  3,  c.  32,  s.  18.     R.  v.  Sanchar,  2  Show.  68,  n.  (a),  3rd  edit. 

(u)  R.  V.  Maidstone  (Corp.),  1  Keb.  733.  R.  v.  Birmingham  (Rector,)  7  A.  &  E. 
256,  and  notes  (a)  and  (6).  Also  see  the  several  titles  throughout  the  work,  and 
supra,  p.  179,  n.  {ii).  As  to  before  whom  a  party  elected  under  mandamus  must  be 
sworn  in,  see  R.  v.  Maiden,  Burr.  2131. 


(r)  R.  V.  Oxon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  429.     S.  C.  Comb.  419. 
(«')  See  tits.  "Churchwarden"  (Swearing  in).     "Mayor"  (S 


wearing  in). 


238  tapping's    mandamus. 

But  such  a  mandamus  will  not  be  granted  to  one,  who  has  had  judg- 
ment on  an  information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto  against  him,  for 
an  usurpation,  unless  he  claim  under  a  subsequent  election  or  title,  for 
the  Court  will  not  assist  him  who  has  no  right.  (./:) 

.]     Rule. — The  rule  for  a  writ  to  swear  in,  &c.,  will,  In  case  the 

right  appear  plain,  be  granted  absolute  in  the  first  instance, (^)  and  if  the 
officer  be  municipal,  as  a  corporator,  the  rule  for  the  writ  will  be  granted 
as  of  course. (i) 

.]     Return,  non  fuit  clectus. — To  such  a  writ,  a  return  that  the 

^prosecutor  "was  not  elected"  is  good,(a)  without  shewing  wherein 
L         J  the  election,  if  one  were  had,  was  rendered  void,  &e.(i) 

If  two  sue  out  a  mandamus,  in  a  case  in  which  one  only  can  be  duly 
elected,  the  defendant  may  return  the  special  matter,  for  he  cannot  tell 
which  to  swear  in.(c) 

.     Enforcing  Duties. — The  writ  lies  to  command  an  elected  officer 

to  discharge  all  the  duties  belonging  or  annexed  to  the  office  ;(f?)  notwith- 
standing he  may  be  liable  to  a  penalty  for  neglect. (c)  So,  although  such 
officer  be  bound  by  an  oath  to  execute  his  office  du]y.(/) 

So,  the  writ  lies  to  command  an  elected  corporate  officer  to  take  upon 
himself  the  duties  of  his  office,  although  he  may  have  paid  a  fine  imposed 
by  a  by-law,  for  refusing  to  accept  it,  if  such  fine  do  not  operate  as  an 
exemption  or  discharge  from  the  duties,  &c.(^) 

So,  if  persons  find  themselves  injured  by  the  non-residence  of  a  muni- 
cipal corporator,  and  the  corporation  refuse  to  interfere  and  to  do  their 
duty,  such  persons  may  apply  to  the  Court  of  B.  R.  for  a  mandamus, 
directed  to  such  a  corporation,  to  enforce  a  performance  of  their  duty,(^) 
and  the  applicant  is  entitled  to  the  writ  in  such  a  case  ex  debito  justi- 

[x)  See  supra,  "Admission."  R.  v.  Heale,  Stra.  G25.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  144T;  3 
Bro.  P.  C.  178.     Vide  Cowp.  509;  2  East,  78  ;  Cora.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.). 

{y)  Bull.  N.  P.  199.  See  Mayor  of  Truro,  M.  1816  ;  2  Chit.  257.t  R.  v.  Coventry 
(Mayor),  3  Doug.  236. 

(z)  4  T.  R.  700.  The  afSdavits  must  shew  an  election,  Bull.  N.  P.  200.  R.  v. 
Harewood,  2  East,  177 ;  2  Mod.  316.     See  post,  tits.  "  Application,"  "  Rule." 

{a)  Cas.  t.  Hard.  130,  n.  (1).  R.  v.  Dr.  Harris,  1  W.  Blac.  430.  S.  C.  Burr.  1420, 
1422.  R.  V.  Harwood,  Ld.  Raym.  1405,  overruling  R.  v.  Sympson,  M.,  11  Geo.  1. 
R.  V.  Dr.  Ward,  1  Barn.  381,  412  ;  Fitzg.  195.  R.  v.  Twitty,  2  Salk.  433.  R.  v. 
York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  66,  72.  R.  v.  Cornwall  (Mayor),  11  Mod.  174.  R.  v.  Guise, 
3  Salk.  88.  S.  C.  6  Mod.  189.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1008.  See  tit.  "  Churchwarden" 
(Swearing  in,  Return,  Non  fuit  Electus) ;  and  see  post,  tit.  "  Return." 

(b)  R.  V.  York  (Sheriff),  2  Show.  154;  Fitzg.  195.     See  post,  tit.  "Return." 

(c)  R.  V.  Guise,  Ld.  Raym.  1008.  S.  C.  6  Mod.  189;  and  see  1  W.  Blac.  430. 
S.  C.  Burr.  1420.     See  tit.  "  Churchwarden"  (Admission). 

{d)  Ante,  p.  12.     R.  v.  Gravesend  (Mayor),  2  B.  &  C.  602.1     See  tits.  "Alder- 
man" (Enforcing  Duty),  "Burgess  Roll,"  "  Canal  Company,"  "Church,"  "Corpora- 
tion Municipal"  (Duties),  "Courts  Inferior,"  "Lectureship,"  "Mayor." 
(e)  R.  V.  Everet,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  261 :  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.) 
(/)  R.  V.  Montacute  (Ld.),  1  W.  Blac.  62.     S.  C.  1  Wils.  283. 
\g)  R.  V.  Bower,  2  D.  &  R.  842.t     S.  C.  1  B.  k  C.  585.t     See  tit.  "  By-law." 
\h)  4  D.  &  R.  772. f    See  tits.  "Alderman"  (Restoration,  Return,  Non-residence). 
\i)  Bull.  N.  P.  199;  3  Blac.  Com.  264,  cited  in  4  D.  &  R.  772. f     See  tit.  post, 
"  Application." 


0  p  p  1 0  E.  239 

The  writ  will  not,  however,  be  granted  on  a  suggestion,  that  the  defen- 
dant is  attempting  an  abuse  of  a  public  office.  Thus,  where  certain  justices 
had  (as  it  was  contended)  illegally  convicted  a  dissenting  minister  of  keep- 
ing a  conventicle,  and  a  mandamus  to  the  justices  was  moved  for  to  permit 
him  to  preach,  the  Court  refused  the  writ,  and  said,  "  that  a  mandamus  is 
always  to  command  the  doing  of  some  act  in  execution  of  law,  whereas 
this  would  be  in  the  nature  of  a  writ,  de  non  molestando.(7')  So,  where 
certain  defendants  held  tobacco,  until  payment  of  a  certain  amount  of 
duty,  which  the  owner  contended,  was  more  than  was  due,  and  he  applied 
for  a  mandamus  to  command  them  to  deliver  it  up ;  it  was  answered,  that 
the  commissioners  *were  not  called  upon  to  perform  a  duty,  but  to  p^^-iqQ-i 
abstain  from  a  wrongful  act,  and  that  if  they  were  not  entitled  to  L 
retain  the  tobacco,  they  were  wrong  doers,  and  liable  to  a  civil  action,  the 
Court  discharged  the  rule,  saying  "  either  the  officers  were  justified  in 
what  they  did,  or  not.  If  they  were,  then  there  was  no  grievance,  but  if 
not  so  justified,  then  the  writ  of  mandamus  is  not  the  proper  remedy. "(Z^-) 

].     Deprivation. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the  mayor, 

&c.,  to  assemble  for  the  purpose  of  considering  the  propriety  of  removing 
certain  members  of  their  body  as  for  non-residence,  &c.,(/)  unless  the  cor- 
poration be  misgoverned. (m)  Nor  does  it  appear,  that  in  any  other  case 
the  Court  can  grant  a  writ  to  turn  out  and  deprive  of  an  office. (h)  Thus, 
it  has  been  held,  that  an  officer  in  upon  a  corrupt  contract  against  stat. 
Edw.  6,  or  guilty  of  simony  cannot  be  removed  by  mandamus.(o) 

].  8th.  Restoration. — Although  most  municipal  corporations  pos- 
sess a  power  of  amotion  over  their  own  members,  yet  the  Court  of  B.  R. 
has  jurisdiction  to  inquire  whether  that  power  has  or  not  been  duly  exer- 
cised; and  where  it  has  not,  to  issue  a  mandamus  to  restore,  &c.(^))  At 
common  law,  a  member  of  a  municipal  corporation  cannot  be  amoved  until 
he  has  been  convicted  of  an  offence  5(2)  so  that  all  further  power  of  amo- 
tion must  be  vested  in  the  corporation  by  their  charter,  &c. ;  and  if  the 
charter,  &c.  give  a  power  of  amotion  for  reasonable  cause,  the  Court  of 

{j)  See  ante,  p.  10,  n.  (/),  119,  n.  [d).  R.  v.  Peach,  2  Salk.  572.  S.  C.  nora 
Peat's  case,  6  Mod.  229.     See  tit.  "Dissenters." 

[k]  Ante,  p.  18,  26.  R.  v.  Customs  (Commrs.),  5  A.  &  E.  380.f  See  tit.  "  Cus- 
toms." 

{I)  Ante,  p.  4,  n.  (6),  102,  n.  {a).  R.  v.  Portsmouth  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  C.  152.t 
S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  767 ;f  2  T.  R.  772;  and  see  tits.  "  Alderman"  (Removal),  "Capital 
Burgess"  (Removal),  supra,  "College"  (Fellows  Expulsion),  (Visitor  Deprivation), 
"Councilman"  (Removal),  and  infra,  "  Return"  (Non-residence). 

[m)  Ante,  p.  9,  10.    See  tit.  "Councilman"  (Removal),  and  see  p.  102,  191,  n.  [t). 

[n]  R.  V.  Gowar,  3  Salk.  230,  7.  See  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Mod.  234.  Calvin's 
case,  7  Rep.  30 ;  Vaughan,  401.  Shuttleworth's  case,  2  Bulst.  122.  But  see  R.  v. 
Totness  (Mayor),  5  D.  &  R.  481.f  R.  v.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  5  D.  &  R.  414.f  See 
tits.  "College"  (Fellows),  "University." 

(o)  R.  V.  St.  John's  Cam.,  Comb.,  288. 

Ip)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  4  M.  &  R.  52.  S.  C.  9  B.  &  C.  l,t 
(where  see  form  of  pleadings),  citing  R.  v.  Leeds  (Mayor),  Stra.  640.  R.  v.  Ax- 
bridge,  2  Cowp.  523.  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  177.  R.  v.  Liverpool  (Mayor), 
Burr.  731.     See  supra,  p.  179,  n.  (m),  and  infra,  "Return." 

(g)  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  94,  cited  in  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  4  M.  &  R.  54.  S.  C. 
9  B.  &  C.  1,  21,f  supra. 


240  tapping's    mandamus. 

B.  R.  will,  by  mandamus,  inquire  into  the  cause;  but  if  it  give  a  power 
of  amotion  for  such  cause  as  such  municipal  corporation  shall  think  rea- 
sonable, such  Court  will  not  interfere.  Thus  where  a  charter  of  incorpo- 
ration declared,  that  "  it  should  be  lawful  for  the  mayor  and  capital 
buro-esses  to  amove  any  of  their  body  for  non-residence  within  the 
borough,"  it  was  held,  that  this  gave  them  a  discretionary,  and  not  a 
compulsory  power  of  amotion ;  and  the  Court  of  B.  R.  refused  a  man- 
damus to  command  them  to  assemble  and  consider  the  propriety  of 
amoving  the  non-resident  members. (r)  And  even  where  a  charter 
r*lQn  *^^  terms  requires  residence,  the  Court  will  not  command  the  cor- 
'-  poration  to  meet,  for  the  purpose  of  considering  the  propriety  of 

removing  non-resident  members,  if  such  power  of  removal  be  discretion- 
ary ;  because  if  a  meeting  be  called,  and  they  do  not  choose  to  remove  the 
non-resident  members,  no  benefit  will  be  derived  from  the  application,  and 
such  a  mandamus  would  aiford  no  remedy  for  the  alleged  evil.(s)  But  if 
the  affidavits  suggest  a  serious  injury  or  inconvenience  to  the  public  by 
the  non-residence,  the  Court  in  its  discretion  may  grant  the  writ.(<) 

The  writ  of  mandamus  will,  on  a  proper  application,  be  granted  by  the 
Court  of  B.  R.  to  restore  to,  or  to  precedency  in(tt)  any  office;  to  which, 
as  before  stated,  admittance  can  be  obtained  through  its  medium. (y)  The 
writ  of  mandamus,  when  applied  to  this  purpose,  is  the  true  specific  remedy 
for  a  wrongful  dispossession  of  an  office  or  function  which  has  temporal 
rights  attached  to  it :  it  is  applicable  to  all  cases  where  the  established 
course  of  law  has  not  provided  a  specific  legal  remedy  by  another  form  of 
proceeding. (2«)  Thus  it  lies  if  an  officer  be  removed  from  his  office  before 
it  is  competent  to  amove  him.(a:)  But  the  office  or  function,(y)  as  before 
stated,  must  be  a  freehold,  or  some  other  matter  of  profit. (2) 

As  to  the  office  for  which  a  mandamus  will  lie,  see  supra,  p.  179, 
note  (a). 

(r)  Ante,  p.  12,  15.  R.  v.  West  Looe,  5  D.  &  R.  414  ;f  and  see  R.  v.  Portsmouth, 
4  D.  &  R.  767.t  S.  C.  3  B.  &C.  152.t  R.  v.  Totness,  5  D.  &  R.  481,f  andthe  cases 
there  collected;  4  M.  &  R.  54.f  S.  C.  9  B.  &  C.  21,1  snpra ;  2  T.  R.  351.  And 
see  R.  V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  149,  where  see  form  of  return  of  amotion 
for  non-residence.  See  tit.  "Alderman"  (Restoration,  Non-residence),  and  infra, 
"Return,"  "Non-residence." 

(s)  Ante,  p.  12—15,  56.  R.  v.  Totness  (Mayor),  5  D.  &  R.  481.f  R.  v.  Ports- 
mouth (Mayor),  4  D.  &  R.  I6l.f  R.  v.  Heaven,  2  T.  R.  112.  And  see  5  D.  &  R. 
414,f  supra  ;  Burr.  2089. 

(t)  Ante,  p.  38,  56;  4  D.  &  R.  76Y,f  supra.  See  tit.  "Alderman"  (Removal); 
p.  190,  n.  {m).     See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

(u)  R.  V.  Miles,  1  Keb.  623.     See  tits.  "  Alderman,"  "Precedence." 

(v)  Ante,  p.  11,  12.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (C).  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  93,  b., 
which  is  the  leading  case  as  to  the  restoration  to  a  municipal  office.  R.  v.  New 
Coll.,  2  Lev.  15.  R.  v.  Buckingham  (Corp.),  10  Mod.  175.  R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  2 
G.  &  D.  587.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  550.t  R.  v.  York  (Sheriffs),  3  B.  &  Ad.  770-1  Hurst's 
case,  1  Lev.  75.  Parker's  case,  1  Vent.  331.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  180. 
Hurst's  case,  1  Keb.  387.  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Mod.  234.  Calvin's  case,  7  Rep. 
20;  Vaughan,  401  ;  2  Bulst.  122. 

[w]  Ante,  p.  12,  18—26.     R.  v.  Blooer,  Burr.  549. 

(z)  Ante,  p.  12.     Northampton's  case,  LoflFt,  549. 

(y)  Ante,  p.  12.     See  ante,  tit.  "Dissenters." 

{z)  Ante,  p.  12,  n.  (r).  (a)  See  supra,  "Election,"  n.  (m). 


OFFICE.  241 

The  Court  will  not,  however,  grant  a  mandamus  to  one  who  is  amoved 
from  his  office  by  a  judgment  on  a  quo  warranto,  for  the  Court  will  act 
upon  such  judgment  until  it  be  reversed,  without  considering  whether  it 
be  a  proper  judgment  or  not;(6)  for  "  res  judicata  pro  veritate  accipitur." 
Nor  will  the  Court  grant  a  mandamus  to  restore  a  person  where  it  is  con- 
fessed that  he  has  been  rightly  removed,  although  the  act  of  removal  may 
have  been  irregularly  or  informally  conducted,  as  that  he  was  not  summon- 
ed, &c. ;  for  the  Court  will  not  grant  this  writ  to  restore,  &c.,  if  the  prosecutor 
may  the  *very  instant  be  properly  and  lawfully  removed. (c)  Nor  pj^goi 
will  the  Court,  in  its  discretion,  grant  the  writ,  although  the 
return  be  insufficient,  if  it  appear  that  there  has  been  a  gross  misbehaviour, 
sufficient  to  warrant  a  removal  from  the  office. (r?)  Nor  will  it  be  granted 
to  restore  a  person,  if  since  his  deprivation  his  right  to  restoration  have 
ceased,  as  by  lapse  of  time.  Thus,  if  a  mayor  be  amoved,  he  shall  not, 
after  his  year  has  elapsed,  have  a  mandamus  to  be  restored. (e)  Nor  will 
it  be  granted  for  one  who  has  consented  to  be  turned  out,(/)  or  who  has 
resigned  his  office. (^) 

.]     tSa.'<j)e7ision. — If  the   applicant  for  the  writ  of  mandamus  be 

actually  in  possession  of  his  office,  never  having  been  entirely  displaced, 
the  writ  will  be  refused,  upon  the  ground  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  res- 
tore him ;  for  there  must  be  an  actual  removal  in  order  to  authorize  the 
writ.(A)  So  the  writ  will  not  be  granted  to  one  who  is  merely  suspended 
from  his  office  quousque,  &c.,  if  there  be  no  power  to  suspend,  &c. ;  for 
the  freehold  still  remains  in  him,  and  he  may  bring  an  action  on  the  case 

{b)  Ante,  p.  Ill,  n.  (m).  R.  v.  Serle,  8  Mod.  332.  S.  C.  8  Mod.  234.  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "Quo  Warranto,"  C.  5.  See  supra,  "  Swearing  in,"  and  tit.  "  Court  Inferior" 
(Judgment,  Execution,  &c.) 

(c)  Ante,  p.  15,  16.  R.  v.  Axbridge,  1  Cowp.  523.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T. 
R.  177,  180,  (which  case  was  decided  after  much  consideration).  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"  Man."  (B.)  R.  t.  Griffiths,  5  B.  &  A.  731.f  R.  v.  Newcastle  (Mayor),  Burr.  530. 
R.  V.  Tidderley,  1  Sid.  14.  R.  v.  Rippon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  433.  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"  Man."  (E.)     But  see  R.  v.  Ward,  1  Barn.  294  ;  and  tit.  "Bridge  House  Estates." 

(d)  Ante,  p.  12—14.  R.  v.  Tidderley,  1  Sid.  14;  and  see  2  T.  R.  180,  and  1 
Cowp.  523,  supra.  See  R.  v.  Argent,  cited  in  2  T.  R.  181.  And  see  2  T.  R.  182, 
n.  (6).  Bassett  t.  Chichester,  1  Sid.  286;  7  Mod.  83,  n.  (a).  See  tit.  "Bridge 
House  Estates." 

(c)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  Mayor  of  Durham's  case,  1  Sid.  33.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man." 
(B.)  See  ante,  tits.  "  Canal  Company,"  "  Highway"  (Tolls),  and  post,  tit.  "  Appli- 
cation." 

If)  R. V.  Lane,  Ld.  Raym.  1304.  But  see  S.  C.  Fort.  275,  where  it  is  said,  that 
consent  to  be  turned  out  is  not  a  resignation.  See  also  R.  v.  Gloucester  (Mayor), 
Holt,  450. 

(g)  Bull.  N.  P.  203.  R.  v.  Jay,  3  Keb.  714.  R.  v.  Mills,  1  Keb.  623.  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "Man."  (B.)  R.  v.  Rippon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  433  ;  Ld.  Raym.  1304.  S.  C.  Fort. 
275  ;  Holt,  450. 

(h)  Ante,  p.  15,  16.    R.  t.  Oxford  (Mayor),  6  A.  &  E.  352,f  per  Williams,  J.    R. 
V.  Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  734.     R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  181.     R.  v.  Whit- 
stable  Fishery,  7  East,  353.    See  tits.  "  Bridge  House  Estates,"  "  Councillor"  (Sus- 
pension). 
May,  1852.— 16 


242  tapping's    mandamus. 

for  such  improper  suspcusion ;(/)  and,  it  seems,  an  action  for  money  had 
and  received  during  his  suspension. (J) 

It  has,  however,  been  held,  that  a  suspension,  under  a  power  to  sus- 
r*lo?^l  V^^^y  ^^-y  *should,  if  there  be  one,  be  shev-nin  the  return,  othor- 
*-  '  wise  it  will  be  bad,(^)  and  the  applicant  will  be  restored ;(/)  and 
it  should  be  so  set  out,  in  order  that  the  Court  may  judge  whether  the 
suspension  be  or  not  for  good  cause. (m)  It  has  also  been  solemnly  de- 
cided, that  the  Court  will  not  grant  the  writ  to  restore  to  an  office,  though 
the  applicant  have  been  irregularly  suspended,  if  it  appear  by  his  own 
shewing  that  there  was  good  ground  for  the  suspension,  had  the  proceed- 
ings been  regular. (?i) 

.]     AjjpUcation. — The  Court  has  always  looked  much  more  strictly 

to  the  right  of  a  party  applying  for  a  mandamus  to  be  restored,  than  to 
that  of  an  applicant  to  be  admitted  to  an  office, (o)  for  in  the  latter  case  it 
is  required  that  he  shew  by  affidavit,  not  only  that  he  has  a  prima  facie 
title,  but  also,  that  he  has  complied  with  all  the  forms  necessary  to  con- 
stitute his  right ;  because  if  he  have  been  before  properly  admitted,  he 
may  incidentally  try  his  right  by  bringing  an  action  for  money  had  and 
received  for  the  profits. (p)  Therefore,  in  order  to  entitle  himself  to  this 
extraordinary  remedy,  he  must  lay  such  facts  before  the  Court  as  will 
warrant  them  in  presuming  that  the  right,  both  legal  and  equitable,  is  in 
him. (2)  It  is  not,  however,  necessary  that  it  should  clearly  appear  that  in- 
justice has  been  done,it  is  sufficient  to  raise  a  reasonable  doubt  in  the  Court 
whether  it  has  or  not ;  especially  when  it  is  considered,  that  if  the  mandamus 
be  refused,  the  party  has  no  direct  remedy,  whereas,  if  granted,  it  does 
not  conclude  them  to  whom  it  is  directed,  as  they  may  dispute  the  ques- 
tion on  a  return  to  the  writ.(r) 

{i)  Ante,  p.  20.  R.  v.  Guildford  (Approved  Men,  &c.),  1  Keb.  868,  880.  S.  0. 
2  Keb.  1.  S.  C.  Raym.  152.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  162,  per  Hyde,  C.  J.,  and  Kelynge,  J., 
but,  Twisden  (totis  viribus)  dissentiente,  for,  said  he,  "  a  suspension  is  a  temporary 
amotion,  and  perhaps  it  will  never  be  discharged."  In  the  following  year,  how- 
ever, a  mandamus  was  granted,  on  the  application  of  the  same  person,  to  restore 
him  to  the  same  office,  but  it  does  not  appear  from  the  reports  (2  Keb.  1 ;  Raym. 
152)  of  the  case  but  that  the  corporation  had  actually  removed  him  in  the  inter- 
mediate time.  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  179,  approved  in  R.  v.  Griffiths,  5B. 
&  A.  736,t  per  Best,  J.  R.  v.  Tyther,  2  Keb.  250.  See  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  171, 
per  Keeling,  C.  J.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.),  and  7  East,  355,  n.  (a)  But  see  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  2.     See  tit.  "College"  (Fellows  Restoration). 

(j)  Ante,  p.  20,  24;  2  T.  R.  182,  per  Ashhurst,  J.  R.  v.  Whitstable  Fishery,  7 
East,  353  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  3  ;  17  Ves.  313. 

ik)  1  Keb.  880,  supra.     R.  v.  Tyther,  2  Keb.  250.     See  post,  tit.  "  Return." 

[l)  See  2  T.  R.  179.     Supra,  n.  [i). 

(m)  1  Keb.  868,  880,  and  2  T.  R.  179,  supra,  n.  {i). 

(n)  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  177.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.),  and  7  East, 
355,  n.  («),  supra,  p.  192,  n.  (/). 

(0)  See  supra,  "  Admission"  (Application). 

(p)  Ante,  p.  24;  3  T.  R.  578,  supra;  1  Done.  134;  1  W.  Blac.  25,  n.  (0),  2nd 
edit;  Stra.  557  ;  Ld.Raym.  1334;  8  Mod.  148;  2T.R.  177;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man." 
(A.)     See  post,  tit.  "Application." 

(q)  Ante,  p.  27,  28  ;  1  W.  Blac.  25,  n.  (0) ;  Cas.  t.  Hard.  100  ;  3  T.  R.  558,  per 
Buller.  J.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

(r)  See  R.  v.  Wyndham,  Cowp.  378.     R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  C  T.  R.  100. 


OFFICE.  243 

Although  on  an  application  for  a  writ  to  be  restored  to  a  municipal 
office,  the  prosecutor  should  show  some  title  in  himself,  yet  the  Court  of 
B.  R.  has,  in  exercise  of  its  superintendeucy  over  such  corporations, 
granted  a  mandamus  where  no  particular  person  was  interested. (s) 

On  motion  for  a  mandamus  to  restore  to  an  office,  there  is  no  need  of 
affidavits  to  show  that  the  applicant  was  once  in,  for  if  he  have  not  been, 
that  fact  may  be  returned  ;(^)  it  is  prudent,  however,  to  be  fortified  with 
such  an  affidavit. 

.]     Rule. — Where  the  mandamus  is  to  admit  or  swear  in,  the 

Court  will,  in  case  the  right  appear  plain,  grant  the  writ  upon  the  first 
motion.  But  *where  it  is  to  restore  one  who  has  been  removed,  r*iQ4-| 
the  practice  in  all  cases  is,  first  to  grant  a  rule  to  show  cause,  (w) 

.]      Writ,  Form  of. — The  writ  for  restoration  to  an  office  need  not 


allege  it  to  be  a  place  of  profit,  for  all  the  precedents  of  such  writs  are  with- 
out any  suggestion  of  pecuniary  loss;  it  is  a  sufficient  ground  for  the  writ 
that  there  has  been  a  loss  of  precedency  or  authority. (y) 

.]     Returns. — Returns  to  a  mandamus  to  restore  are  of  two  kinds ; 

1st.  Traverses,  or  those  which  deny  some  material  fact  or  facts,  being  the 
suggestion  and  ground  of  the  writ ;  2nd.  Special,  or  those  that  confess 
the  amotion,  and  justify  \t.{iv) 

1.  Traverses.  Among  the  various  returns  that  may  be  made  by  way 
of  traverse  to  a  mandamus  to  restore,  "non  fuit  amotus"  is  the  most  usual, 
and  goes  to  the  foundation  of  the  writ.(x)  So  "  non  fuit  admissus"  is  a 
good  return,  for  amotion  depends  upon  the  admission,  and  therefore,  such 
a  return  of  "  non  fuit  admissus"  is  but  a  special  ''  non  fuit  amotus."(x) 
So  a  return  of  "  non  appunctuatus"  has  been  held  to  be  good. (2)  So 
"  non  fuit  electus"  is  a  good  return,(a)  and  without  shewing  wherein,  the 

(s)  Ante,  p.  11,  32,  n.  {lu).  R.  v.  Nottingham  (Town),  Bull.  N.  P.  201.  See  tit. 
"  Corporation  Municipal,"  and  post,  tit.  "Application." 

{t)  R.  V.  Cutlers'  Company,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  129.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.) 

\u)  Bull.  N.  P.  199.  See  Mayor  of  Truro,  M.  1816,  2  Chit.  257.1  R.  v.  Coventry 
(Mayor),  3  Doug.  236. f  See  supra,  "Admission"  (Rule),  "Swearing  in"  (Rule), 
post,  tit.  "  Rule." 

{v)  Ante,  p.  12,  n.  (r),  191,  n.  (m).  Bagg's  case,  11  Co.  93,  a.  See  a  precedent, 
temp.  H.  6,  cited  in  Dyer ;  6  Ed.  2,  Clo.  Rolls,  membr.  8,  in  which  the  words  are, 
de  liberis  consuetudinibus  et  a  libertate  Civitatis.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  Palm. 
453;  Noy,  92.  S.  C.  Latch.  229.  See  tits.  "Alderman"  (Restoration),  "Prece- 
dence," and  post,  tit.  "  Writ." 

(w)  See  post,  tit.  "  Return." 

\x)  R.  V.  Chester  (City),  5  Mod.  11.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  3.  R.  v.  Buck- 
ingham (Corp.),  10  Mod.  174,  citing  Hereford's  case,  1  Sid.  209,  210.  See  tit. 
"  Traverse,"  1  Doug.  84.  See  form  of  traverses  in  amotions  as  to  municipal  offices. 
R.  V.  Slirewsbury  (Mayor),  Cas.  t.  Hard.  147.      See  post,  tit.  "Return"  (Traverse). 

[z)  Ruding  v.  Newel,  Stra.  983. 

(«)  See  tit.  "Churchwarden"  (Swearing  in.  Return,  Non  fuit  Electus).  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  3,  D.  4.  R.  v.  StafiFord  (Mayor),  2  Keb.  264;  March,  288,  pi. 
237  ;  Cas.  t.  Hard.  130,  n.  (1).  R.  v.  Dr.  Harris,  1  W.  Blac.  430.  S.  C.  Burr. 
1420,  1422.  R.  V.  Harwood,  Ld.  Raym.  1405,  overruling  R.  v.  Simpson,  M.  11 
Geo.  1.  R.  V.  Dr.  Ward,  1  Barn.  381,  412.  S.  C.  Fitzg.  195.  R.  v.  Twitty,  2  Salk. 
433.  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  66,  72.  R.  v.  Cornwall  (Mayor),  11  Mod.  174. 
R.  V.  Guise,  3  Salk.  88.     S.  C.  6  Mod.  189.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1008. 


244  tapping's    mandamus. 

election,  if  any  have  been  had,  was  rendered  void.(/>)  So  a  return  of 
"wo  such  office"  has  been  held  to  be  good.(c)  So,  any  other  traverse  of 
material  matter.  Thus,  to  a  mandamus  to  restore  A.,  who  was  duly  elect- 
ed, sworn,  and  admitted,  (mentioning  no  time),  a  return  "  that  A.  was  on 
the  29th  August  duly  elected,  but  that  neither  at  his  election,  nor  since, 
nor  yet,  is  he  sworn  or  admitted,  and  therefore,  &c.,"  is  a  good  return, (c?) 
it  being  a  traverse  of  a  material  portion  of  the  writ. 

2.  Special  Returns;  or  those  which  confess  an  amotion,  and  justify  it 
*must  be  specially  stated.  They  must  not  only  accurately  state 
L  J  the  justification  in  extenso ;  but  such  justification,  when  so  stated, 
must  also  be  legally  sufficient  in  substance.  (()  Thus  to  a  writ  to  restore, 
a  return  that  another  prasfectus  et  juratus  est,  to  the  same  office,  has 
been  held  to  be  bad,  as  containing  no  legal  avoidance  or  justification. (/) 
Such  a  special  return  should  shew  :  1st.  The  cause  or  causes  of  removal. 
2ndly.  The  power  of  removal.  Srdly.  A  summons,  when  necessary,  or 
its  equivalent.  4thly.  That  the  causes  of  removal  are  true.  5thly,  and 
lastly.  That  the  removal  was  founded  upon  the  alleged  causes  of  removal. 
In  other  words,  the  return  should  shew  that  the  prosecutor  was  removed 
in  a  legal  manner,  and  for  a  legal  cause. (g) 

.  1st.    The  Cause  or  Causes  of  Removal. — The  general  grounds 

of  disfranchisement,  and,  therefore,  of  return,  in  cases  of  municipal  offices, 
are  of  three  kinds :  1.  Such  ofiences  as  are  against  the  oath  and  duty  of 
the  officer,  and  to  the  prejudice  of  the  municipal  corporation,  which  being 
breaches  of  official  trust  and  condition,  need  not  a  previous  conviction  -, 
but  such  corporation  may,  in  the  first  instance  proceed  to  disfranchise, 
there  being  an  inherent  power  in  every  such  corporation  so  to  do.  Thus 
an  offence  is  no  cause  of  disfranchisement,  unless  it  be  of  a  thing  done 
which  works  to  the  destruction  of  the  body  corporate,  or  of  the  liberties 
or  privileges  thereof;  so  that  no  personal  offence,  offered  by  one  member 
to  another,  as,  for  instance,  an  assault,  is  good  ground  of  disfranchise- 
ment ;(/i)  nor  is  a  mere  breach  of  contract  or  covenant  a  good  return. 
Thus,  a  return  that  the  prosecutor,  contrary  to  his  indenture,  had  married 
within  two  years,  has  been  held  to  be  bad.(i) 

(b)  R.  V.  York  (Sheriff),  2  Show.  154;  R.  v.  Ward  (Dr.),  Fitzg.  195.  See  post, 
tit.  "Return"  (Traverse). 

(c)  Supra.  R.  v.  Dartmouth  (Mayor),  3  Salk.  229.  See  tits.  "Ashburton" 
(Eight  Men  of,"  "  Curate,"  p.  113,  n.  (^r). 

(d)  R.  T.  Lynn  (Mayor),  Andr.  105.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  3. 

(e)  R.  V.  Dover  (Mayor),  IG  L.  J.,  N.  S.  101,  M.  C.  These  returns  require  great 
gkill  in  the  preparation,  and  should,  therefore,  be  settled  by  counsel.  See  post,  tit. 
"Return,"  (Certainty). 

(/)  R.  V.  Cornwall  (Corp.),  11  Mod.  174,  citing  Doug.  79,  80.  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."  D.  3,  D.  4. 

(a)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (J.) ;  Burr.  731.     See  post,  tit.  "Return." 
(h)  Ante,  p.  39,  n.  (k);  Bull.  N.  P.  203,  204;  Garth.   173.     See  tits.  "Free- 
dom" (Company,  Admission),  "Alderman"  (Restoration,  Return),  and  infra,  n. 

(t)  Ante,  p.  125,  n.  (t).     R.  v.  Townsend,  1  Keb.  458,  470,  659.     S.  C.  1  Lev.  91. 


OFFICE. 


245 


2.  Such  misbehaviours  as  arc  general  offences,  and  which  render  infa- 
mous, as  perjury,  forgery,  &c.,  although  they  have  not  any  immediate 
relation  to  the  office ;  for  in  such  cases  it  is  the  loss  of  credit,  or  in  other 
words,  the  infamy,  which  is  the  ground  of  forfeiture,  and  therefore  con- 
viction, which  is  the  ground  of  the  infamy,  must  precede  the  disfranchise- 
ment ;(_;■)  so  that  if  the  crime  upon  which  the  conviction  is  founded,  be 
such  as  does  not  carry  infamy  with  it,  it  will  be  no  cause  of  disfranchise- 
ment, as  if  one  be  convicted  of  *a  simple  assault. (A-)  But  when  a  p:i:iqr.-i 
conviction  disables  a  man  from  holding  an  office,  a  return  of  the  •- 
offence,  without  stating  the  conviction,  is  good.(^) 

ord.  Such  misfeasances  as  partake  of  both  those  previously  mentioned, 
namely,  by  being  a  breach  of  oath  and  duty,  and  an  offence  at  common 
law ;  these  are  clearly  causes  of  disfranchisement,  without  a  previous  con- 
viction ;  as  to  this  point,  however,  there  was  formerly  a  great  diversity  of 
opinion,  and  what  is  said  in  Bagg's  case,  "  that  if  a  party  be  convict  of 
an  offence  against  his  duty,  and  to  the  prejudice  of  the  corporation,  it  i>; 
good  cause  to  remove  him,"  wovild  seem  to  imply  that  a  previous  convic- 
tion is  necessary,  but  it  is  not  so,  for  if  the  whole  paragraph  be  considered, 
it  will  appear  that  it  is  only  referrible  to  those  cases  where  there  is  no 
power  of  amotion. (m) 

Havino-  thus  stated  a  general  outline  of  those  offences,  a  commission  of 
which  create  a  forfeiture  of  a  municipal  office,  it  merely  now  remains  to 
treat  specifically  of  the  principal  of  those  offences. 

.     Bribery. — A  return  that  the  prosecutor  corruptly  bribed  one  of 

the  burgesses  to  vote  for  a  Member  of  Parliament,  and  a  power  of  amo- 
tion for  such  cause  is  good,  if  there  have  been  a  precedent  conviction. («) 
But  in  another  case,  on  a  return  that  the  prosecutor  corruptly  gave  money 
to  one  of  the  corporation  to  vote  for  a  mayor,  the  Court  was  equally 
divided ;  two  of  the  Judges  holding  that  a  precedent  conviction  was  neces- 
sary ;  the  other  two  that  it  was  not :  but  it  was  then  stated  by  the  Court, 
"  that  for  such  offences  as  are  such  at  common  law  merely,  a  precedent 
conviction  is  necessary;  because,  in  such  case,  the  removal  is  on  the 
ground  of  infamy;  but  that  for  an  action  prejudicial  to  the  corporation, 

S.  C.  1  Sid.  107.  S.  C.  Raym.  G9.  See  also  R.  v.  York  Railway,  14  L.  J.,  N.  S 
277,  Q.  B.     See  tit.  "  Citizen"  (Restoration). 

(j)  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  98,  99.  S.  C.  1  Roll.  224,  which  is  the  leading  case  on 
this  subject ;  8  Mod.  101.  R.  v.  Derby  (Mayor),  Cas.  t.  Hard.  154 ;  Bull.  N.  P.  206. 
Lane's  case,  Ld.  Raym.  1304.  S.  C.  Fort.  200,  275.  S.  C.  11  Mod.  270,  but  dif- 
ferently reported.  R.  v.  Richardson,  Burr.  538  ;  8  Mod.  100  ;  Fort.  206.  R.  v. 
Liverpool,  Burr.  732.  See  tits.  "  Alderman"  (Restoration,  Return),  "Conviction," 
and  post,  p.  196,  n.  (o). 

{k)  Bull.  N.  P.  206,  supra,  p.  195,  n.  (A). 

[l]  Anon.,  2  Show.  183. 

(?n)  See  infra,  n.  (o).  Cas.  t.  Hard.  154.  Haddock's  case,  Ray.  435.  See  return 
o{  Bribery,  infra,  n.  («).  R.  v.  Hutchinson,  8  Mod.  101,  citing  Yate's  case,  Sty. 
477.  R.  V.  Ipswich  (Bailiffs),  2  Salk.  434.  But  see  Bull.  N.  P.  206.  See  tit.  "  Al- 
derman" (Restoration,  Return). 

(n)  R.  V.  Newcastle  (Mayor),  commonly  called  Parrott's  case,  M.  8  Anne,  cited 
in  R.  V.  Derby  (Mayor),  Cas.  t.  Hard.  154. 


246  tapping's    mandamus. 

as  well  as  contrary  to  the  common  law,  the  party  may  be  disfranchised, 
without  a  prior  conviction."(o) 

.  Desertion  ;  Non-residence,  &c. — Public  offices  having  been  in- 
stituted for  the  public  good,  are  determined  by  nonuser  or  desertion. (p) 
Thus  if  a  member  of  a  municipal  corporation,  as  an  alderman,  burgess, 
&c.,  desert  or  cease  to  reside  within  the  limits  of  his  corporation,  such 
desertion,  &c.  is  a  good  cause  of  amotion,  and  therefore  of  return  5(2) 
and  the  expression  of  such  desertion,  &c.  in  a  return,  by  the  words 
L  J  deseruit  et  reliquit  is  *sufficient,  for  they  signify  a  total  deser- 
tion 5  (r)  the  return  must  allege  a  total  desertion,  or  it  will  be  insufficient 
in  substance. (s) 

But  non-residence,  though  a  good  cause  of  removal,  does  not  ipso  facto 
determine  the  office,  for  there  must  be  judgment  of  amotion  by  the  cor- 
poration, before  an  information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto  will  lie,(<) 
so  in  general  the  Court  of  B.  K.  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  to  elect  ano- 
ther upon  non-residence,  unless  the  non-resident  party  have  been  previ- 
ously removed. (w)  It  has  also  been  held,  that  if  a  non-resident  officer 
attend  his  office,  though  he  live  out  of  the  corporation,  yet  his  attendance 
upon  the  office  will  be  a  sufficient  residence.(f) 

Where  the  non-residence  is  a  good  ground  of  amotion,  it  is  not  neces- 
sary to  summon  to  come  in  and  reside  previously  to  the  proceedings  to 
amove.  (?^) 

.]     Drunhenness. — Habitual  drunkenness  is   a  good  return  to  a 

mandamus  to  restore,  but  contra,  if  the  prosecutor  were  drunk  by  acci- 
dent, (x) 

.]     Erasing  Corporation  Boohs. — Erasing  or  making  false  entries 

(0)  Ante,  p.  196,  n.  (A),  (/).  R.  v.  Carlisle  (Alderman),  8  Mod.  19,  99.  S.  C. 
11  Mod.  378.  S.  C.  Stra.  385.  S.  C.  Fort.  200,  cited  in  Derby  (Mayor),  Cas.  t. 
Hard.  155.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  99.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3.  R.  v.  Tiverton 
(Mayor),  8  Mod.  186. 

{p)  R.  V.  Campion,  1  Sid.  14.  Exeter  (City)  v.  Glide,  4  Mod.  36.  Stanton's 
case.  Moor,  135.     See  tit.  "Alderman." 

{q)  R.  X.  Truebody,  11  Mod.  75.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1275.  S.  C.  Holt,  449.  R.  v. 
Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  149,  569.  Exeter  (City)  v.  Glide,  4  Mod.  36  ;  Bull.  N. 
P.  206  ;  1  Show.  258,  364.  R.  v.  Leicester  (Mayor),  Burr.  2087.  R.  v.  Newcastle 
(Mayor),  Burr.  530  ;  Say.  39.  See  form  of  return  of  non-residence,  &c.,  1  Doug. 
135.     See  tit.  "  Alderman"  (Restoration,  Return,  Non-residence). 

(r)  Ante,  p.  40.     R.  v.  Exeter  (Mayor),  1  Show.  364,  365,  per  Holt,  C.  J.,  and 
Eyre,  J.     S.  C.  4  Mod.  36.     S.  C.  Holt,  169,  435.     See  tit.  "Alderman." 
■     (s)  Ante,  p.  59,  n.  {h)  ;  Burr.  2087,  supra;  Smith's  case,  4  Mod.  56  ;  Bull.  N.  P. 
207.     R.  V.  Leicester  (Corp.),  Burr.  2087. 

U)  R.  V.  Heaven,  2  T.  R.  772  ;  1  Show.  365,  n.  (a),  3rd  edit.  R.  v.  Ponsonby, 
Ves.  6.  S.  C.  5  Bro.  P.  C.  287.  S.  C.  Say.  245;  Bull.  N.  P.  211.  Exeter  (City) 
v.  Glide,  4  Mod.  36. 

(m)  R.  v.  Truro  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  A.  590  ;t  S.  C.  2  Chit.  257.t  See  supra,  "  Elec- 
tion." 

(w)  11  Mod.  75,  supra.  R.  v.  Exon  (Mayor),  1  Show.  260,  3rd  edit.,  n.  [h).  R. 
V.  Leicester  (Mayor),  Burr.  2087.     See  return  of  non-attendance,  1  Doug.  177. 

(w)  Ante,  p.  40,  (Summons);  1  Doug.  149 — 160.  See  infra,  tit.  "Summons.'' 
R.  V.  Exon  (Mayor),  1  Show.  259,  3rd  edit.,  n.  {b). 

{x)  R.  T.  Taylor,  3  Salk.  231.  See  tits.  "Aldermap"  (Restoration,  Return)' 
"  Parish  Clerk"  (Restoration,  Return). 


OFFICE. 


247 


in  corporation  books,  is  not  only  an  offence  at  common  law,  but  also 
against  the  official  duty,  and  therefore  good  cause  of  disfranchisement ;(,//) 
the  erasure  should,  however,  be  alleged  to  be  detrimental  to  the  corpora- 
tion.(2) 

.]     Incapacifi/. — Also  to  such  a  writ,  a  return  of  any  incapacity, 

is  good,  if  the  defendant  be  the  judge  of  it  ;(a)  a  confession  of  an  amo- 
tion and  a  justification  of  it  on  such  a  ground  is  a  very  common  species 
of  return. (/j) 

.]     Incompatible   Office. — If  a  prosecutor  have   taken  a   second 

office,  which  is  incompatible  with,  and  avoids  his  tenure  of  a  prior  one ; 
such  fact,  if  properly  stated,  will  be  a  good  return. (c) 

.]     Slander. — A  return  of  an  amotion,  because  the  prosecutor  has 

*spoken  opprobious  or  slanderous  words  of  an  officer  of  the  same  r*;|^9g-| 
corporation,  is  not  good,  unless  spoken  concerning  the  official  duties 
of  such  officer  ;(r)f)  but  if  so  spoken,  the  prosecutor  may  be,  therefor,  dis- 
franchised, without  a  previous  conviction. (e) 

.]     Neylect  of  Official  Duties. — If  an  officer  act  contrary  to  the 

nature  and  duty  of  his  office ;  or  if  he  refuse  to  act  at  all,  the  office  may 
therefor  become  forfeited ;  so  that  all  commissions  or  omissions,  within 
the  spirit  of  such  rule,  will  form  a  good  matter  of  return  in  confession  and 
avoidance,  to  a  writ  of  mandamus  to  restore,  &c.(/)  Thus  a  general 
neglect  or  refusal  to  attend  to  the  duties  of  an  office,  is  a  ground  of  for- 
feiture ;  so  determined  neglect  or  wilful  refusal ;  but  a  single  instance  of 
omittino-  to  attend,  when  no  particular  business  was  expected,  does  not 
work  a  forfeiture. (5-)  Thus  occasional  non-attendance  at  the  Court  of 
Quarter  Sessions,  is  no  cause  of  forfeiture  of  a  municipal  office ;  for  though 
there  be  a  difference  between  public  offices  that  concern  the  administra- 

{y)  Bull.  N.  P.  204  ;  ante,  p.  40.  R.  v.  Wilton  (Mayor),  M.  8  Wm.  3 ;  Ld.  Raym. 
225.  S.  C.  5  Mod.  257.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  428.  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Chalk,  Comb.  396, 
397.  R.  V.  Derby  (Mayor),  Cas.  t.  Hard.  153,  per  Hardwicke,  C.  J.  Yates's  case, 
Sty.  480.  R.  V.  Perrott,  M.  T.,  8  Anne.  But  see  R.  v.  Hutchinson,  8  Mod.  100, 
citing-  Fort.  200.    See  tit.  "  Alderman"  (Restoration,  Return,  Erasing  Corp.  Books). 

(z)  R.  V.  Chalk,  Ld.  Raym.  226. 

(a)  Ante,  p.  72.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  8  Mod.  148  ;  10  Mod.  174.  See  tits. 
"Churchwarden"  (Swearing  in,  Return,  Incapax),  "Lectureship." 

{h)  Ante,  p.  194.  R.  v.  Guildford  (Approved  Men),  1  Lev.  162.  S.  C.  1  Keb. 
868,  880.     S.  C.  Raym.  152  ;   10  Mod.  174. 

(c)  R.  V.  Sandwich  (Corp.),  2  Keb.  92.  Awdley's  case.  Latch.  123.  R.  v.  Pate- 
man,  2  T.  R.  777.     See  tit.  "Town  Clerk"  (Restoration,  Return). 

(d)  R.  v.  Gloucester  (Mayor),  Holt,  450.  Jay's  case,  1  Vent.  302.  S.  C.  3  Keb. 
714.  Clark's  case,  1  Vent;  327.  S.  C.  Cro.  Jac.  506.  Parker's  case,  1  Vent.  331. 
Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  98.  S.  C.  1  Roll.  79;  11  Mod.  379.  R.  v.  Raines,  3  Salk.  234. 
Earle's  case,  Carth.  173,  where  sec  form  of  return.  See  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Chan- 
cellor), Stra.  557.    See  tits.  "  Alderman"  (Restoration,  Return),  "  Councillor"(Res- 

toration,  Return).  _  .       ^^ 

Lord  Hale  usually  required  such  a  return  to  be  sworn.  See  tit.  "  Councillor ' 
(Restoration,  Return),  and  post,  tit.  "  Return." 

(c)  Ante,  p.  195,  per  Fortescue,  J.,  11  Mod.  379.     But  see  R.  v.  Lane,  Fort.  275. 

(/)  Ante,  p.  194.  See  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Office"  (M.)  See  infra,  n.  {g),  (/«),  as  to 
return,  and  see  post,  tit.  "Return." 

{g)  Burr.  2004;  2  Salk.  434.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1233.  See  tit.  "Recorder'  (Res- 
toration, Return). 


248  tapping's    mandamus. 

tion  of  justice,  and  private  offices,  in  this,  that  nonuser  in  the  one,  is  no 
forfeiture  without  a  request,  and  some  special  loss  occasioned  thereby,  as 
it  is  in  the  other ;  yet  as  the  absence  of  a  single  officer,  as  an  alderman, 
does  not  hinder  the  holding  of  Courts,  or  the  valadity  of  the  acts  of  that 
Court,  such  an  absence  docs  not  amount  to  a  neglect  or  nonuser  of  such 
office,  (/i.) 

.]     Oaths. — As  to  a  return  of  omission  to  take  oaths,  see  supra, 

titles  Aldermen  (^Restoration  ;  Return);  Admission  (^Return  ;    Oaths^. 

.]  Statement  in  Return  of  Causes  of  Removal. — Where  an  amo- 
tion is  returned,  the  return  must  contain  all  the  facts  necessary  to  shew 
that  the  prosecutor  was  removed  in  a  legal  and  proper  manner,  and  for 
a  legal  cause.  It  is  not  sufficient  to  state  conclusions  only,  the  facts 
themselves,  upon  which  the  amotion  was  founded,  must  be  precisely 
alleged,  in  order  that  the  Court  may  be  the  judge  of  the  matter  ;(ij 

^  so  that  a  general  alleeation  of  neglect  *and  omission  of  duty,  has 
r*1991  ... 

L         -"  been  held  to  render  such  a  return  insufficient,(ji')  and  to  warrant  a 

peremptory  mandamus. (/i.-)     So  a  return  which  alleged  the  articles  or 

causes  of  removal,  "ad  effectum  sequentem,"  has  been  held  to  be  ill.(l) 

This  principle  does  not,  it  seems,  apply  to   an  amotion  from  the  office  of 

common  councilman  ;(7?i)  nor  to  any  office  which  is  either  at  pleasure  or 

discretionary,  (/i) 

The  cause  of  removal  must  shew  a  neglect  of  duty,  &c.,  in  the  j^articu- 

lar  office  from  which  the  prosecutor  has  been  removed. (o)     So  that  a 

return  that  the  prosecutor  had  misbehaved  as  chamberlain,  and  therefore 

[k)  Bull.  N.  P.  202,  203.  R.  v.  Bristol  (Mayor),  1  Show.  288.  R.  v.  Pomfret 
(Mayor),  10  Mod.  108  ;  Reynell's  case,  9  Rep.  99.  Serjt.  Whitaker's  case,  2  Salk. 
434.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1233.  R.  v.  Carlisle,  Stra.  385.  R.  v.  Leicester  (Mayor), 
Burr.  2087.  R.  v.  Wells,  Burr.  1999.  R.  v.  Richardson,  Burr.  517.  R.  v.  Exon 
Mayor),  1  Show.  260,  3rd  edit.,  n.  (b).  R.  v.  Wells  (Corp.),  Burr.  1999.  Shrews- 
bury's case,  9  Rep.  46  b. 

(i)  Bull.  N.  P.  203.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (I.)  See  post,  tit.  "Return."  R.  v. 
Buckingham  (Corp.),  10  Mod.  174,  175.  R.  v.  Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  731,  per 
Mansfield,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  Say.  37  ;  and  see  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1566. 
R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  261.t  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  432.  R. 
V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  149.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  98.  R.  v.  Exon  (Mayor), 
1  Show.  259,  3rd  edit.  Freeman's  case,  Cro.  Car.  579.  R.  v.  Corye,  Sty.  87.  R. 
v.  Wilton  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  438.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  225.     S.  C.  5  Mod.  255,  257. 

(j)  R.  V.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  15G6.  S.  C.  Say.  37;  Doug.  144. 
Warren's  case,  Cro.  Jac.  540.     R.  v.  Deighton,  2  Keb.  656.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 

{k)  R.  V.  Shaw,  12  Mod.  113.     R.  v.  Apleford,  2  Keb.  861,  and  cases  there  cited. 

(?)  R.  V.  Hutchinson,  8  Mod.  102  ;  but  see  S.  C.  Fort.  200.  R.  v.  Bear,  2  Salk. 
417.     Pullen  v.  Palmer,  Ld.  Raym.  496.     See  post,  tit.  "  Return." 

(m)  Dighton's  case,  1  Vent.  82.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  656.  Warren's  case,  Cro.  Jac.  540. 
See  tit.  "  Councilman." 

(n)  See  ante,  p.  12—15.  R.  v.  Eve  (Bailiffs),  4  B.  &  A.  271.1  S.  C.  1  B.  &  C. 
85.     S.  C.  2  D.  &R.  172.t 

(o)  Ante.  Bull.  N  P.  203.  Lord  ITawley's  case,  1  Vent.  145.  Anon.,  Sty.  151. 
Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  93  b.  R.  v.  Chalkc,  Ld.  Raym.  255.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  428.  R. 
V.  Hutchinson,  8  Mod.  99.  R.  v.  Newbury  (Mayor),  1  Q.  B.  751-1  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D. 
388. 


OFFICE.  249 

they  had  removed  him  from  his  office  of  capital  burgess,  has  been  held  to 
be  bad.Qj) 

,     2iid.    The  Power  of  Removal,  &c. — The  power  to  remove  or 

suspend,  must  be  shewn  upon  the  face  of  the  rcturn,(5')  in  order  that  the 
Court  may  see  both  that  such  a  power  exists,  and  that  it  has  not  been 
exceeded;  for  if  the  power  to  remove  be  only  for  "reasonable  cause,"  the 
Court  will  inquire  into  the  cause. (r) 

In  a  return  to  a  mandamus  to  restore,  if  it  be  stated  that  the  prosecu- 
tor was  removed  by  the  municipal  body  at  large  for  a  corporate  offence,  it 
is  unnecessary  to  aver  that  a  power  of  removal  for  such  offence  is  vested 
in  them;  because  such  a  power  is  inherent  in  their  constitution,  and 
therefore  the  law  will  take  notice  of  it  without  averment,  according  to  the 
rule  ''  Expressio  eorum  quae  tacite  insunt  nihil  operatur."  Sometimes, 
however,  such  power  is  expressly  given  by  charter,  by-law,  &c.  to  a  select 
part ;  if  vested  in  a  select  part,(s)  the  return  should  shew  how,  whether 
by  charter  or  ^prescription,  &c.  If  the  prosecutor  mean  to  contend  r-^i^.^QA-. 
that  it  is  vested  in  a  select  part,  he  may  either  allege  it  in  reply  •- 
to  the  return,  or  bring  an  action  for  a  false  return. (^) 

The  return  should  shew  that  the  power  of  removal  has  been  duly  exer- 
cised;(«)  thus,  as  a  corporation  cannot  amove  by  an  order,  but  only  by 
an  act  under  the  Common  Seal,  so  such  an  act  must  be  shewn  in  the 
return. (i;)  But  where  an  election  is  merely  entered  in  a  book,  a  bare 
order  of  discharge  is  suffieient.(w)  So,  where  a  return  stated  the  amotion 
to  have  been  made  per  Majorem  et  Burgenses  generally,  the  Court  pre- 
sumed it  to  have  been  executed  by  all,  and  not  by  the  mayor  and  major 
part  of  the  burgesses,  for  "  indefinitum  tequipollet  universali,"  and  stated 
if  all  tlie  burgesses  were  not  there,  an  action  for  a  false  return  would  have 
lain.(x)     But  where  a  return  alleged  that  the  mayor,  &c.  had  met  in  the 

(;j)  R.  V.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  15G4.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  264.  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "  Man."  D.  4. 

[q)  R.  V.  Loudon  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  ITD.  Brace's  case,  Str.  819.  R.  y.  Guildford, 
1  Lev.  162.     S.  C.  1  Keb.  8G8,  880.     S.  C.  Ray.  152.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  4. 

(r)  Ante,  p.  198,  n.  (t).  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  267-1  R.  v.  Strat- 
ford-upon-Avon (Mayor),  1  Lev.  291 ;  Ld.  Raym.  710.  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  13  East, 
419,  and  n.  {a).  R.  v.  Tliame  (Churchwardens),  Str.  115.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U), 
8  Mod.  161,  per  Pratt,  C.  .1.,  citing  5  Rep.  57. 

(.s)  R.  V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  149,  where  see  form  of  return.  R.  v. 
Richardson,  Burr.  517.  Haddock's  case,  Raym.  439.  Lord  Bruce's  case,  Stra. 
819.  Symmers  v.  Rcgem,  Cowp.  502.  R.  v.  Lj'me  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  149. 
Exeter  (City)  v.  Glide,  4  Mod.  34,  n.  (a).  R.  v.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  Say.  38.  R. 
V.  Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  732.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (I.) 

(t)  1  Doug.  149,  (^144),  supra.  R.  v.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  Say.  38.  S.  C.  Bull. 
N.  P.  201,  205.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1564.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3.  R.  v.  Fevers- 
ham,  8  T.  R.  536.     Bac.  Ab.  tit.  "Man."  (I). 

A  power  of  amotion  ad  libitum  not  being  incident  to  a  corporation,  must,  when 
relied  upon,  be  positively  alleged;  2  Salk.  430,  n.  (a). 

(u)  R.  V.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  Say.  38.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3. 

()/)  Bull.  N.  P.  204.  R.  V.  Wilton  (Mayor),  5  Mod.  259.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  428.  R. 
V.  Holt,  3  Keb.  700,  cases  there  cited. 

iw)  R.  V.  Chalke,  Ld.  Raym.  226. 

(x)  R.  v.  Brayfield,  2  Keb.  489,  and  Colchester's  case  there  cited;  1  Bulst.  160; 
March.  165.     And  see  Dightoa  y.  Staflbrd  (Corp.),  2  Keb.  641. 


250  tapping's    mandamus. 

council  house,  but  it  was  not  said  to  be  at  a  common  council  there  hekl. 
such  return  was  quashed. (^) 

The  return  should  also  shew,  that  the  body  removing  had  not  onlj'  the 
power  to  remove,  but  were  legally  constituted  for  the  occasion.  So  that 
it  is  not  sufficient  to  say  that  the  common  council  in  due  manner  met  and 
assembled,  it  must  expressly  allege  that  they  were  all  summoned  ^(z)  for 
the  omission  to  summon  one  member,  resident  within  the  limits  of  the 
borough,  to  a  corporate  meeting,  avoids  the  acts  of  that  meeting,  (a)  But 
a  return  which  stated  that  the  body  was  duly  assembled  to  amove,  &c., 
has  been  held  to  be  sufficient. (i) 

The  notice  to  the  corporators  to  meet,  should  contain  a  statement  of  the 
particular  business  for  which  their  presence  is  required. (o) 

.  3rd.  Summons  ;  when  Necessari/. — After  a  person  has  been  ad- 
mitted to  an  office,  he  cannot  be  justly  amoved  from  it  in  invito  without 
having  previously  forfeited  it,  and  an  inquiry  had,  as  to  whether  there  has 
been  a  forfeiture  or  not ;  which  inquiry  can  only  be  made  after  the  party 
*amoved  has  been  personally  summoned  to  answer  the  matters 
'-  *■     -*  wherewith  he  is  charged. (f^) 

A  summons,  therefore,  is  in  general  necessary  in  all  cases  where  the 
amotion  is  in  invito.  But  where  the  prosecutor  is  amoved  for  non-resi- 
dence, or  he  reside  out  of  the  borough,  &c.,  the  corporation  is  not  bound 
to  go  out  of  its  jurisdiction  to  summon  him.(e)     It  must,  however,  clearly 

[y)  R.  V.  Gloucester  (Mayor),  3  Bulst.  126.    See  post,  tit.  "Return"  (Certainty). 

{z)  Bull.  N.  P.  204.  R.  T.  Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  232,  723.  Com  Dig.  tit. 
"  Man."  D.  4.  How  a  removal  was  effected  need  not  be  alleged  on  a  removal  from 
an  office  durante  bene  placito.  R.  v.  Holt,  3  Keb.  *700.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor), 
2  Show.  70.     Ante,  p.  176. 

{a)  R.  Y.  Shrewsbury  (Mayor),  Cas.  t.  Hard.  147.  S.  C.  Stra.  1051.  S.  C.  Andr. 
171.  S.  C.  Ridgw.  46.  S.  C.  14  Vin.  Abr.  583,  c.  4  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  208.  R.  v.  Grimes, 
Burr.  2598.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  90.  R.  v.  Gaskin,  8  T.  R.  209.  R.  v.  Truebody, 
Ld.  Raym.  1275.  R.  v.  Chalke,  Ld.  Raym.  226.  R.  v.  Darlington  School,  6  Q.  B. 
707.t 

(6)  R.  v.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  2  Ld.  Ken.  391  ;  Burr.  738. 

(c)  R.  v.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  Burr.  738;  R.  v.  Carlisle  (Corp.),  Stra.  384 ;  11 
East,  84,  n.  (a),  nom.  Machell  v.  Nevinson,  E.  10  Geo.  1. 

[d]  Supra,  p.  195  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  204;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (L)  R.  v.  London 
(Mayor),  Holt,  169,  170.  R.  t.  Gaskin,  8  T.  R.  209.  R.  v.  Davies,  9  D.  &  R.  209.t 
R.  V.  Smith,  5  Q.  B.  619. f  S.  C.  1  D.  &  M.  565,  where  see  plea  of  "no  summons." 
S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  166,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  Latch.  229.  S.  C.  Palm. 
455.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  93  b.  Painter  v.  Liverpool  Gas  Companv,  3  A.  &  E. 
433.f  R.  V.  Langley,  5  Q.  B.  619,t  n.  {g).  R.  v.  Neale,  4  N.  &  M.  868  jf  5  Q.  B. 
622,f  n.  (c).  R.  v.  St.  James'  (Vicar),  5  Q.  B.  622.t  R.  v.  Darlington  School,  6 
Q.  B.  709.t  R.  V.  Griffiths,  5  B.  &  A.  731.}  The  Protector  v.  Colchester  (City), 
Sty.  447,  453.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  Stra.  566,  per  Fortescue,  J.  S.  C.  Fort.  204. 
R.  T.  Aldborough,  10  Mod.  101 ;  10  Mod.  180,  n.  (/").  Dunch  v.  Norwich  (City),  2 
Salk.  436.  R.  v.  Bentlej-,  Stra.  912.  R.  v.  Litchfield  (Ep.),  7  Mod.  217;  1  Bing. 
357.f  Dr.  Sherlock  v.  Norwich  (Dean),  Fort.  222.  See  further,  as  to  summons, 
tit.  "  Alderman"  (Summons). 

(«)  R.  V.  Exeter  (Mayor),  1  Show.  365,  366.  S.  C.  Comb.  198.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  33. 
S.  C.  Holt,  169,  435.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  27;  and  see  supra,  Cowp.  503  ;  1  Doug.  149. 
R.  V.  Shrewsbury  (Mayor),  7  Mod.  202.  R.  v.  Truebodv,  11  Mod.  75.  S.  C.  Ld. 
Raym.  1275.  S.  C.  Holt,  449.  R.  v.  Grimes,  Burr.  2598."  See  1  Kyd.  on  Corp.  443. 
Bagg's  case,  11  Co.  99.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  149.  See  tit.  "Alder- 
man" (Return,  Summons).     A  corporate  office  does  not  become  ipso  facto  vacant 


OFFICE.  251 

appear  that  the  non-residence  is  with  the  intention  of  withdi-awing  per- 
manently, or  the  Court  will  grant  a  peremptory  mandamus. (/) 

But  where  a  good  and  true  cause  of  suspension  or  removal  is  returned, 
the  Court  will  not,  although  the  prosecutor  have  not  been  summoned, 
restore  him  to  his  office.  Thus,  where  a  corporator  declared  that  he  would 
serve  no  longer,  and  was  thereupon  removed,  the  Court  refused  to  restore 
him,  though  he  had  not  been  summoned. (^)  So  after  a  voluntary  resig- 
nation. (7i)  So,  where  a  mandamus  was  applied  for  to  restore  a  town 
clerk,  upon  the  goound  that  he  had  been  removed  without  notice  to  ap- 
pear and  defend  himself,  the  Court  refused  the  writ,  because  it  was  ad- 
mitted there  was  sufficient  cause  for  the  amotion. (i) 

.     For  tohat  offices. — Those  offices  only  which  are  of  a  freehold 

nature,  whatsoever  the  ground  of  amotion  may  be,  require  a  previous 
summons,  &c.(y)  For  to  a  mandamus  to  restore  an  officer  who  is  in  at 
^pleasure  only,  it  is,  as  before  stated,  a  good  return  to  say,  it  was  ^^of\f)-[ 
their  pleasure  to  remove  him,  and  in  such  a  case  a  summons  is  L  "  J 
not  necessary ;( A;)  but  if  by  the  return  it  should  appear  that  such  officer 
was  amoved  for  some  misfeasance,  and  the  power  to  remove  ad  libitum  be 
not  returned  nor  relied  upon,  then  the  return  must  allege  a  summons,  &c. 
as  in  other  cases. (Z)  So,  no  summons  previously  to  removal  is  necessary, 
where  there  is  a  discretionary  power  of  amotion.  (?») 

.     Form  of  summons. — The  cases  diifer  considerably  as  to  whether 

the  summons  may  be  merely  general  in  its  terms,  or  that  it  is  necessary 
that  it  should  particularly  specify  the  matters  to  be  charged.  Thus,  the 
Court  has  on  many  occasions  stated,  that  there  need  not  be  any  summons 
to  answer  particular  matters  ;(?i)  on  other  occasions  the  Court  has  said, 
that  the  prosecutor  should  have  had  a  particular  summons  for  a  particular 
charge,  and  that  it  is  not  sufficient  to  summon  generally,  and  then  to 
allege  particular  crimes,  &c.  against  him,  which  he  may  not  be  prepared 

by  non-residence, — it  is  a  forfeiture ;  but  the  francliise  is  not  lost  till  a  sentence 
of  amotion  has  been  pronounced;  see  ante,  p.  19*7.  R.  v.  Exon  (Mayor),  1  Show. 
260,  3rd  edit.,  n.  (A),  citing  R.  v.  Heaven,  2  T.  R.  *7'72.  1  Show.  365,  citing  Moore, 
135,  833. 

(/)  Ante,  p.  197.  R.  v.  Truebody,  Ld.  Raym.  1275.  R.  v.  Leicester  (Mayor), 
Burr.  2089.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  149.  See  Espinasse's  Dig.,  2nd 
edit.,  p.  679.     See  tit.  "Alderman"  (Restoration,  Return,  Non-residence). 

[g)  Ante,  p.  192.  R.  v.  Axbridge,  Cowp.  523.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R. 
177.  R.  v.  Dr.  Gaskin,  8  T.  R.  209.  R.  v.  Tidderley,  1  Sid.  14.  Hazard's  case,  2 
Roll.  11. 

(h)  Ante,  p.  192.     R.  v.  Rippon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  433.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  563. 

\i)  Ante,  p.  192.  R.  v.  Exon  (Mayor),  1  Show.  259,  3rd  edit.,  n.  (c),  citing  260, 
n.  \j)     R.  V.  Axbridge  (Mayor),  Cowp.  523. 

(y)  Recorder  of  Colchester's  case,  2  Keb.  G56  ;  and  see  Sid.  461.  R.  v.  Dighton, 
supra,  p.  176,  n.  (<). 

(/c)  Ante,  p.  176.  R.  v.  Thame  (Guardians),  Stra.  115.  R.  v.  Holt,  3  Keb.  700. 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (D.  3).     Dighton  v.  Stratford-upon-Avon,  2  Keb.  641. 

[l]  Ante,  p.  176.  Stra.  115,  supra.  R.  v.  Ipswich  (Bailiffs),  2  Salk.  435,  16. 
S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1233. 

(rn)  Ante,  p.  12—15.     R.  v.  Darlington  School,  6  Q.  B.  682.f 

[n)  R.  V.  Wilton  (Mayor),  5  Mod.  259.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  428.  S.  C.  Ld.Raym.  225. 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3. 


252  tapping's    mandamus. 

to  answer. (o)  It  would  seem,  that  the  summons  should  specially  allege 
the  grounds  of  the  amotion.     No  public  notice  is  necessary. (p) 

.     Allegation  of  Summons  in  Return. — As  the  fact  of  summons 

is  necessary  to  a  legal  amotion,  so  a  specific  allegation  of  summons,  or  of 
equivalent  facts,  in  a  return  of  such  an  amotion,  is  so  requisite  to  its 
validity  that  its  absence  is  an  objection  that  can  never  be  got  over.(2) 
Therefore,  in  all  cases  in  which  a  mandamus  is  brought  to  command  a 
restoration  to  an  ofl&ce,  the  return  must  not  only  shew  the  cause  of  remo- 
val, but  that  the  party  removed  was  summoned  to  answer,  or  was  heard 
in  his  defence.  Thus,  although  a  municipal  corporation  have  lawful  au- 
thority, either  by  charter  or  prescription,  to  remove,  and  may  have  had 
just  cause  to  remove  the  prosecutor,  yet,  if  it  appear  from  the  return  that 
they  proceeded  against  him  without  having  either  summoned  or  heard 
him  in  answer  to  what  was  objected  against  him,  such  removal  will  be 
void,  and  will  not  bind  the  prosecutor,  because  it  is  against  justice  and 
right. (r)  So,  where  a  return  *did  not  show  upon  the  face  of  it 
I-  -'  that  the  prosecutor  had  been,  previously  to  amotion,  summoned  or 
heard  as  to  the  matters  objected  against  him,  it  was  quashed. (.s)  It  is  not 
however  necessary,  that  the  prosecutor  should,  in  pursuance  of  the  sum. 
mons,  have  appeared  to  answer  the  charge. (/) 

An  allegation  of  non-attendance,  licet  summonitus,  has  been  held  good 
by  three  judges,  contra  Holt,  C.  J.,  who  held  a  particular  summons  to  be 
necessary. (h)  So,  an  objection  taken  to  a  return  to  a  mandamus  to  restore 
to  the  office  of  alderman,  that  it  was  not  stated  that  the  alderman  had 
notice  to  defend  himself,  but  that  he  had  been  summoned  to  attend  in  his 
place  as  alderman,  was  overruled ;  it  being  held,  that  such  an  allegation 
was  equivalent  to  a  formal  notice. (f)     So,  if  the  return  say  "quod  pro- 

fo)  Exeter  (City)  v.  Glide,  4  Mod.  37,  n.  («).  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  99.  R.  v. 
Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  731.  Morris's  case,  M.  7  Wm.  3,  cited  in  Mod.  37.  R. 
V.  Exoa  (Mayor),  1  Show.  259.  R.  v.  Clialke,  Ld.  Raym.  225.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  428. 
S.  C.  5  Mod.  254,  257.  R.  t.  Exeter  (Mayor),  1  Show.  365,  3rd  edit.,  per  Holt,  C.  J. 
R.  v.  Cambridge  (Chancellor),  Stra.  557.     See  infra,  n.  («). 

{p)  R.  T.  Shrewsbury  (Mayor),  7  Mod.  202,  citing  Serjeant  Glide's  case,  4  Mod. 
33.  S.  C.  1  Show.  258,  364.  S.  C.  Comb.  197.  S.  C.  Holt,  169,  435.  S.  C.  12 
Mod.  27,  251.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  223. 

{q)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (U.),  8  Mod.  164,  citing  Dr.  Bentley's  case,  2  Barn.  19,  22. 
R.  ^.  Shrewsbury  (Mayor),  7  Mod.  202.  R.  v.  Wilton  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  434.  S.  C. 
Ld.  Raym.  225.     S.  C.  5  Mod.  255,  257. 

{r)  Bragg's  case,  11  Co.  99  b.,  cited  in  R.  v.  Smith,  1  D.  &  M.  573.  S.  C.  5  Q. 
B.  614. f     See  p.  200,  and  tits.  "  Alderman"  (Restoration  Summons). 

(s)  9  Edw.  4,  14.  Campion'  s  case,  2  Sid.  97.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  99  a.  Anon., 
Sty.  151,  447.  The  Protector  v.  Colchester  (Town),  Sty.  452.  R.  v.  Brayfield,  2 
Keb.  488.  R.  v.  Dr.  Gaskin,  8  T.  R.  209.  R.  v.  Aldborougb  (Borough),  10  Mod. 
101.  R.  V.  Cooper,  1  Keb.  777.  R.  v.  Heaven,  2  T.  R.  772.  Dr.  Bentley's  case, 
Fort.  202,  206,  235.  S.  C.  Stra.  557;  Ld.  Raym.  1334;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D. 
3,  D.  4.     R.  V.  Cambridge  (U.),  8  Mod.  154.     Exeter  (City)  v.  Glide,  4  Mod.  37. 

{t)  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3. 

[u]  R.  T.  Glyde,  12  Mod.  28.  S.  C.  1  Show.  364.  S.  C.  Holt,  169,  435.  S.  C. 
Ld.  Raym.  223  ;  1  Doug.  149  ;  Cowp.  503  ;  supra,  p.  199,  n.  (z).  See  ante,  p.  202, 
n.  (n),  (o),  (/). 

{v)  R.  V.  Gaskin,  8  T.  R.  210,  citing  11  Co.  99  a.     R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  M.,  26 


ORGANIST. 


253 


curaverunt  cum  summoueri,"  it  is  sufficient,  (ic)  Eat  an  allegation  of  licet 
ssepius  requisitus,  &c.,  has  been  held  not  to  be  sufficient  to  express  a  sum- 
moning, (.x) 

If  it  be  alleged  "  that  the  prosecutor  appeared  and  was  beard,"  it  is 
sufficient;  for  appearance  cures  a  want  of  summons,  and  in  such  case 
a  summons  need  not  be  alleged,  for  the  Court  will  presume  he  was  heard 
in  his  defence.(2)  So,  an  allegation  of  "quod  fuit  auditus  de  materiis 
objectis"  has  been  held  to  be  sufficient,  although  it  did  not  state  that  he 
was  summoned;  for  the  intent  of  the  summons  is,  that  the  prosecutor  may 
be  heard. (a)  But  a  return  that  the  prosecutor  was  heard  of  that  and 
other  crimes,  without  stating  what  crimes,  has  been  held  to  be  bad  ;(i) 
because  it  did  not  appear  but  the  crimes  were  such  as  would  not  justify  a 
disfranchisement,  and  the  Court  will  intend  nothing  but  what  is  sufficiently 
alleged,  (c) 

.]  4th.  Proof  that  Causes  of  Removal  are  True. — It  should  ap- 
pear on  the  return,  that  on  the  hearing,  &c.,  had  in  pursuance  of  the 
summons,  &c.,  *the  charge  for  which  the  prosecutor  was  removed  |-*204] 
was  proved ;  it  is  not  sufficient  to  state  merely  that  he  was  present 
when  the  charge  was  made,  and  did  not  deny  it.(fZ)  The  return  should 
also  describe  the  nature  of  the  proof,  which  must  be  such  as  is  allowed  at 
common  law.(e) 

.]     5th.  Removal  founded  on  alleged  Cause  of  Removal. — The  return 

should  upon  the  face  of  it  shew,  that  the  judgment  of  amotion  was  found- 
ed upon  the  evidence  given(/)  against  the  prosecutor  on  the  hearing  had 
in  pursuance  of  the  summons. 

.]  9th.  As  to  compensation  for  loss  of  office,  see  tit.  Compensa- 
tion (  Office). 

Organist.]     Election. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the  vicar, 

(w)  R.  V.  Braithwaite's  case,  1  Vent.  19  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3. 

(x)  R.  V.  Wilton  (Burgesses),  5  Mod.  258.  Exeter  (City)  v.  Glide,  4  Mod.  37.  S. 
C.  1  Show.  364.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  223 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Mint."  D.  4. 

(z)  R.  V.  Dyer,  1  Salk.  181.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1406.  R.  t.  Johnson,  Stra.  261. 
R.  V.  Wilton  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  428.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  225,  nom.  R.  v.  Chalke.  S. 
C.  5  Mod.  255,  257.  R.  t.  Exon  (Mayor),  1  Show.  259,  366,  3rd  edit.,  n.  (c).  R. 
V.  Ipswich  (Bailiffs),  2  Salk.  435.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1233.  S.  C.  Holt,  444.  R.  v. 
Oxford  (Mayor),  Palm.  453.  R.  v.  Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  731.  See  2  T.  R.  181. 
R.  V.  The  Baily,  1  Keb.  33.  R.  y.  Gloucester  (City),  3  Buls.  189.  R.  v.  Shrews- 
bury (Mayor),  7  Mod.  202. 

(a)  5  Mod.  259.     S.  C.  Salk.  428,  supra;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3. 

(6)  R.  V.  Wilton  (Mayor),  5  Mod.  259.  Manaton's  case,  Raym.  365.  Sec  post, 
tit.  "Return"  (Certainty). 

(c)  Supra,  n.  (s).     See  post,  tit.  "Return." 

(d)  R.  V.  Faversham  Fishers,  8  T.  R.  352,  365;  2  B.  &  Ad.  705.t  R.  v.  Richard- 
son, Burr.  538.  Harman  v.  Tappenden,  1  East,  562  ;  and  see  1  M.  &  S.  697.  R.  v. 
Carmarthen  (Burgesses),  1  M.  &  R.  697  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  202.  R.  v.  Neal,  4  N.  &  M. 
868.1  R.  V.  Smith,  1  D.  &  M.  564.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  614.t  See  tit.  "  Parish  Clerk" 
(Return). 

(e)  R.  V.  Wilton  (Mayor),  5  Mod.  258. 

(/)  8  T.  R.  354;  Burr.  538,  supra.  R.  v.  Buckingham  (Corp.),  10  Mod.  176, 
citing  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  97.  R.  v.  Oxon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  429.  R.  v.  Ipswich 
(BailifiFs),  2  Salk.  435     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1233. 


Overseers — Stcearing 

in 

-  205 

Duty,  &c. 

- 

-  206 

Accounts 

- 

-  206 

Rendering 

- 

-  206 

Allowance 

- 

-  206 

Payment 

- 

-  207 

254  tapping's    mandamus. 

&c.,  of  a  parish,  to  meet  for  the  purpose  of  electing  an  organist  for  the 
parish  church,  although  for  all  time  of  living  memory,  there  may  have 
always  been  an  organist,  who  has  been  paid  a  stipend  out  of  the  church- 
rates,  (/y) 

.]     AdmUsion. — At  a  vestry  meeting  convened  for  the  purpose  of 

electing  an  organist,  it  was  unanimously  agreed  that  the  course  pursued 
on  a  former  vacancy  should  be  followed ;  namely,  that  a  committee  of  the 
vestry  should  elect  six  out  of  the  candidates,  who  should  perform  in  the 
parish  church  each  on  a  separate  Sunday,  and  that  one  of  the  six  candi- 
dates should  be  received.  It  was  held,  that  this  mode  of  proceeding  was 
not  unreasonable,  and  that  the  Court  would  not  grant  a  mandamus  to 
admit  to  the  office  a  person  in  whose  favour  the  greatest  number  of  votes 
had  been  tendered,  but  who  was  not  one  of  the  six  candidates. (A) 

Overseers  of  the  Poor.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 

OVERSEEBS. 

Election  -  -  -  -  204 

Appointment  .  -  -  205 

Application  -  -  -  205 

Affidavits  -  -  -  205 

Return  -  -  -  205 


.]    Election. — The  writ  lies  to  command  justices  of  the  peace  to 

hold,  *under  the  provisions  of  a  local  act,  a  petty  sessions,  and 
L  *'  -J  thereat  receive  from  the  vestry  clerk  a  list  of  the  names  of  those 
nominated  by  the  inhabitants  to  serve  the  office  of  overseers  of  the  poor, 
and  to  select  and  appoint  therefrom  certain  of  them  to  serve  such  office  ;(i) 
and  also  to  command  parish  officers  to  produce  the  poor-rate  and  other 
books,  at  a  scrutiny  of  the  votes  given  at  a  poll  which  has  been  taken  for 
the  election  of  overseers. (J) 

.]  Ajipointment. — The  writ  will  also  be  granted  to  command  jus- 
tices of  peace  to  appoint  overseers  for  a  place  by  law  entitled  to  have 
thcm,(Z-)  notwithstanding  it  may  be  extra-parochial,  if  it  be  a  vill,  which 

[ff)  Ex  parte  Le  Cren,  2  D.  &  L.  571.  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  34,  Q.  B.  It  is  not 
an  office  known  to  the  law.  Ante,  p.  113,  n.  [//).  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Known  to  the 
Law.) 

{h)  2  D.  &  L.  571,  supra.    See  tit.  "  Office"  (Admission). 

{{)  R.  V.  Hedger,  4  P.  &  D.  61.  S.  C.  12  A.  &  E.  139,  151.f  S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
117,  M.  C.  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Churchwarden"  (Election),  "  Office" 
(Election),  "Parish"  (Officers,  Election). 

(./)  R.  V.  Fall,  1  G.  &  D.  118.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  636.f  See  tits.  "  Church"  (Church 
Trustees),  ''Churchwarden"  (Election),  "Vote."     And  post,  p.  208,  n.  (o). 

(k)  Ante,  p.  9,  27,  28.  R.  v.  Horton,  1  T.  R.  374.  R.  v.  Newell,  4  T.  R.  266.  R. 
V.  Salop  (J.),  3  B.  &  Ad.  DlO.f  R.  v.  Worcestersh.  (J.),  12  A.  &  E.  28.  S.  C.  3 
P.  &D.  465.  S.  C.  9L.  J.,  N.  S.  81,M.  C.  S.  C.  4  Jur.  1009.  R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.), 
Say.  148.  R.  v.  Lancaster  (J.),  2  Barn.  430,  431.  R.  v.  Palmer,  8  East,  416  ;  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "Man."(D.) 

(/)  R.  V.  Rufford  (Inhabs.),  Str.  512.     S.  C.  Fortes.  321.     S.  C.  8  Mod.  39.    S.  C. 


OVERSEERS     OF     THE     POOR.  255 

must  be  shewn  on  the  affidavits ;(/)  or  for  a  hamlet,  which  never  before 
had  overseers,  if  entitled  to  have  thcm.(m)  So  where  a  parish  consists 
of  several  townships,  some  of  which  maintain  their  own  poor,  and  have 
overseers  separately  appointed,  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  to  com- 
mand a  separate  appointment, (?;)  notwithstanding  the  statutory  period 
of  time  within  which  they  should  have  been  appointed,  may  have  ex- 
pired. (?(Ji) 

The  writ  does  not,  however,  lie  to  command  an  overseer  to  allow  inspec- 
tion of  his  appointment,  such  an  application  being  properly  the  subject  of 
an  appeal  to  the  sessions. (o) 

.  A^^plication  ;  Affidavits. — The  affidavits  must  expressly  shew- 
that  the  place  in  question  actually  is  or  is  reputed  to  be  a  V\\\,{2^)  or 
otherwise  as  by  act  of  Parliament,  &c.,  entitled  to  have  overseers. 

.  Return. — It  is  a  good  return  to  such  a  mandamus,  that  the  place 

for  which  the  overseers  are  sought  to  be  appointed  is  not  entitled  to  have 
them.(*^) 

.]     Swearing  in. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  churchwardens 

to   *perform  the  ministerial  act  of  swearing  in  overseers  of  the  r^^nc^-i 
poor  ;(>•)  and  the  rule   for  this  purpose  is  absolute  in  the  first  ^ 
instance,  (s) 

.  Duty,  tt-c. — The  Court  will  not,  by  mandamus,  command  an 

overseer  to  join  in  doing  a  particular  act,  if  there  be  a  concurrence  of 
the  majority,  because  that  is  sufficient ;  but  if  one  will  neither  do  nor  join 
in  the  doing  of  an  act  which  he  ought  to  do,  the  Court,  in  either  case, 
will  grant  a  mandamus  to  compel  him.(^) 

.]    Accowifa,  Rendering. — As  justices  of  the  peace  have,  under 

Stat.  17  Geo.  2,  c.  38,  a  discretionary  power  whether  or  not  they  will  com- 
mit overseers  for  not  rendering  an  account ;  so  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will 

Foley,  0,  cited  in  2  Stilk.  486,  marg.  R.  v.  Lancash.  (J.),  1  D.  &  R.  485-1  R.  v. 
Sparrow,  7  Mod.  393,  wliere  see  form  of  writ.  S.  C.  Stra.  1123,  and  cases  there 
cited.  See  1  T.  R.  3T4,  supra;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  R.  v.  Bedfordsb.  (J.), 
Cald.  157.  R.  v.  Peterborough  (J.),  Cald.  238  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)  And 
tit.  "Churchwardens." 

[m)  R.  V.  Westmoreland  (J.),  T.  19  and  20  Geo.  2  ;  1  Wils.  138 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."  (A.) 

(n)  R.  T.  Horton,  1  T.  R.  374.  R.  v.  Palmer,  8  East,  416,  and  see  R.  t.  Walsall,  2 
B.  &A.  157.t 

[nn)  Ante;  p.  22,  n.  (2).  R.  v.  Sparrow,  supra,  n.  {I).  See  tit.  "Act  of  Parlia- 
ment." 

(o)  Ante,  p.  21.  R.  v.  Harrison,  IG  L.  J.,  N.  S.  33,  M.  C.  See  tits.  "  Books,  &c.," 
"  Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

[p)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Bedfordsh.  (J.),  Cald.  157,  238.  See  post,  tits.  "Affi- 
davits," "  Application"  (Affidavits). 

[q)  R.  V.  Welbeck  (Inhabs.),  Stra.  1143.  And  see  Burr.  1391,  1393,  supra. 
See  ante,  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration,  Return),  and  post,  tit.  "  Return." 

(r)  R.  V.  Manchester  (Churchwardens),  7  D.  707.  See  tits.  "Churchwardens" 
(Swearing  in),  "  Office"  (Swearing  in).     See  post,  tit.  "Return,"  and  ante,  p.  12. 

(s)  Ibid.     See  post,  tit.  "  Rule." 

[t)  Ante,  p.  9,  15.  R.  v.  Beeston,  3  T.  R.  592.  See  tits.  "Alderman"  (En- 
forcing Dutv),  "  Corporation  Municipal"  (Duties,  &c.),  "  Office"  (Enforcing  Duties), 
"  Poor." 


256  tapping's    mandamus. 

not  command  them  to  issue  their  warrant,  under  that  statute,  against  the 
overseers,  on  their  default.  («) 

The  "writ,  Avill,  however,  be  granted  to  command  overseers,  &c.,  to  pass 
their  accounts,  pursuant  to  stat.  50  Geo.  3,  c.  49. (y)  So  it  lies  to  com- 
mand the  Quarter  Sessions  to  hear  and  determine  a  complaint  against  ex- 
overseers,  &c.,  for  not  having  signed,  passed,  and  delivered  to  the  succeed- 
ing overseers,  &c.,  proper  accounts  conformably  with  stat.  17  Geo.  2,  c. 
38  ;  to  which  the  defendants  may  return  that  they  have,  in  fact,  signed, 
&c.  their  accounts. (it-)  But  a  mandamus  to  command  ex-overseers  to 
account  under  stat.  '13  Eliz.  c.  2,  with  the  then  present  overseers,  has 
been  quashed,  because  by  such  statvite,  the  account  is  to  be  rendered  to 
the  justices,  &c.,  and  not  to  the  overseers. (a;)  So  it  will  not  lie  to  com- 
mand them  to  account,  unless  it  appear  that  there  is  no  other  remedy. (?/) 
So  where  overseers  produce  their  accounts  to  the  auditor  appointed  by 
the  poor  law  commissioners,  but  refuse  to  furnish  particulars  of  the  items 
of  those  accounts,  the  Court  will  not  grant  a  mandamus,  to  compel  them 
to  do  so,  the  auditor  having  it  in  his  power  to  disallow  such  charges.  (2) 

.]     Allowance. — The  writ  lies  to  command  justices  to  examine, 

allow,  and  pass  the  accounts  of  the  overseers  of  the  poor,  under  stat.  50 
Geo.  3,  c.  49,  s.  1  (a),  and  also  to  command  them  to  swear  such  overseers 
^.-,^„.,  to  their  *aecounts,  under  stat.  17  Geo.  2,  c.  38;  but  if  the  jus- 
■-  "  -'  tices  have  a  legal  objection  to  do  so,  they  may  return  it.(i)  The 
application  for  the  writ  is  granted  as  of  course. (c) 

The  writ  will  also  be  granted  to  command  the  Quarter  Sessions  to  enter 
continuances,  and  receive  and  hear  an  appeal,  which  ought  to  be  received, 
against  the  allowance  of  overseers'  accounts,  &c.(r/)  So  as  to  an  appeal 
af^ainst  an  allowance  of  the  accounts  of  an  assistant  overseer,  unless  there 
be  a  limitation  in  the  warrant  of  his  appointment,  which  prevents  his 
accountability  to  the  parish. (e)     So  against  the  allowance  of  the  accounts 

(m)  Ante,  p.  12,  15.  R.  v.  Norfolk  (J.),  1  N.  &  M.  GY.f  See  tits.  "Accounts,' 
"  Churchwardens"  (Accounts). 

\v)  Ante,  p.  9.  R.  v.  Warwicksh.  (J.),  2  D.  &  R.  299.t  5  B.  &  C.  430.t  See 
tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "Churchwardens"  (Accounts),  "Constable"  (Accounts). 

(w)  R.  V.  Worcestersh.  3  D.  &  R.  299.t  R.  v.  Carrocke,  1  Bott.  P.  L.  299  ;  Show. 
395.     See  tit.  "  Churchwarden"  (Accounts). 

(x)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.     Anon.,  2  Salk.  525,  6. 

(?/)  Ante.  p.  18—27.     R.  v.  Shepton  Mallett  (Overseers),  5  Mod.  421. 

(2)  R.  V.  Halifax  (Overseers),  10  L.  J..  N.  S.  81,  M.  C.     See  tit.  "  Auditor." 

(a)  Ante,  p.  9.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (J.),  8  D.  89,  citing  R.  v.  Flockwold  Inclosure, 
2  Chit.  251.  R.  V.  Barlow.  2  Salk.  609,  and  cases  there  cited.  R.  v.  Eaton,  9  L. 
J.,  N.  S.,  98,  M.  C,  per  Parker,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Townsend,  1  Bott.  305,  p.  318.  See 
tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "Churchwardens"  (Accounts,  Allowance,  &c.) 

\b)  R.  V.  Middlesex  (J.),  1  Wils.  125.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.) 

(c)  1  Wils.  125,  supra,  n.  [h).     See  post,  tit.  "Application." 

(d)  Ante,  p.  9,  11.  R.  v.  Colchester  (J.),  5  B.  &  A.  535.t  S.  C.  1  D.  &  R.  UG.f 
R.  V.  Norfolk  (J.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  944.t  R.  v.  Gloucestersh.  (J.),  1  B.  &  Ad.  2.\  R. 
v.  Dorsetsh.  (J.),  15  East,  198.  R.  v.  Worcestersh.  (J.),  5  M.  &  S.  457.  See  tit. 
"  Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

(e)  R.  V.  Watts,  7  A.  &  E.  464.t     R.  v.  Worcestersh.  (J.),  5  M.  &  S.  457. 


1p  A  R  I  S  H.  257 

of  ex-oversecrs,  and  this  though  a  special  sessions  may  have  previously 
allowed  them,  under  stat.  50  Geo.  3,  c.  49,  s.  l.(/) 

But  as  to  the  power  of  Quarter  Sessions  to  allow  accounts  submitted  to 
them  annually  by  overseers,  imdcr  stat.  50  Geo.  3,  c.  49,  s.  1,  on  their  going 
out  of  office,  is  not  taken  away  by  stat.  4  &  5  Wra.  4,  c.  76,  s.  47,  which 
requires  such  accounts  to  be  passed  quarterly,  before  an  auditor  appointed 
by  the  poor  law  commissioners ;  therefore  where  a  sum  disallowed  by  the 
auditor,  at  his  quarterly  audit,  was  afterwards  allowed  by  justices,  in  pass- 
ing the  annual  accounts,  the  Court  refused  to  command  the  justices  to 
to  order  the  overseers  to  pay  over  to  their  successors,  the  sum  which  had 
been  so  disallowed  by  the  auditor.(r7) 

.     .     Payment. — On  a  proper  case  being  shewn,  the  Court 

will  grant  the  writ  to  command  justices  to  proceed  on  a  complaint  against 
overseers,  under  stats.  43  Eliz.  c.  2,  ss.  2  &  4,  and  17  G.  2,  c.  38,  s.  3,  for 
refusing  to  pay  over  the  balance  of  money  in  their  hands, (^)  and  also  if 
necessary  and  proper  to  issue  a  distress  warrant  against  them,  in  order  to 
compel  such  payment.(0  A  writ  for  such  purpose  will  be  granted  upon 
the  application  of  one  only  of  the  existing  overseers,  although  the  others 
refuse  to  concur  in  the  application. (j) 

The  writ  also  lies  to  command  overseers  to  pay  to  the  treasurer  of  an 
union,  certain  sums  of  money  in  pursuance  of  orders  of  guardians  of  the 
poor,  and  to  levy  a  rate  for  that  purpose,  if  necessary. (/^) 

*Palace  Court.]     See  tit.  Courts  Inferior  {Palace  Court).     [*208] 

Papers  Official.]  See  titles  ^cco^mfe;  Company;  Books;  Manor 
{Polls,  Inspection);  Peace  (Clerk  of);  Records,  &c. 

Parish.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


SH. 

Parish. 

Meeting 

-  208 

Burial  of  parishioners    - 

-  209 

OfEcei's 

-  208 

Loan,  &c.       -         -         - 

-  209 

Election 

-   208 

Repayment 

-  209 

Auditors 

-  208 

Appeal 

-  210 

Accounts 

-  208 

Reimbursement 

-  210 

Books,  &c. 

-  209 

Payment  of  money 

-  210 

Inspection 

-  209 

Rates             _         _         - 

-   210 

Delivery,  &c. 

-  209 

Defaulters 

-  210 

( /•)  5  B.  &  A.  535.t     S.  C.  1  D.  &  R.  146.f     Supra,  n.  {d). 
(g)  R.  V.  Dartmouth  (Earl),  1  D.  &  M.  12G.     S.  (J.  5  Q.  B.  878.1 
(/«)  R.  v.  Carter,  4  T.  R.  246 ;  2  Sess.  Cas.  283  ;  2  M.  &  S.  343  ;  Stra.  992 ;  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)     See  tits.  "Churchwardens,"  "Constable"  (Accounts,  Ins- 
pection), "Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices). 

(j)  R.  v.  Essex  (J.),  3  B.  &  Ad.  941.t  R.  v.  Somersetsh.  (J.),  M.  18  Geo.  2,  Stra. 
992.  R.  V.  Pascoe,  2  M.  &  S.  343.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  R.  v.  Staffordsh. 
(J.),  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  81,  M.  C.  But  see  R.  v.  Norfolk  (J.),  1  N.  &  M.  67.f  See  post, 
tit.  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices).  And  see  stats.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  9  &  10 
Vict.  c.  113  (I.),  App.,  and  ante,  p.  142,  n.  [z). 

(J)  2  M.  &  S.  343,  supra,  n.  (i).     See  post,  tit.  "Application." 
[k)  R.  V.  Todmorden  (Overseers),  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  129,  M.  C.     See  tits.   "  Con-- 
stable,"  "  Money,"  "  Poor"  (Relief,  &c.) 
May,  1852.— 17 


258  taiting's    mandamus. 

.]     Parish  Meeting. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  will,  on  a  proper  case 


beinfT  laid  before  it,  issue  a  mandamus  to  command  cburclnvardcns,  &c.  to 
convene  a  meeting  of  the  parishioners. (/) 

•]      Ojjiccrs,  Election.' — The  writ  also  lies  to   command  them  to 

proceed  to  the  election  of  parish  oificers,(m)  as  to  proceed  to  hold  a  poll 
and  complete  the  election  of  trustees  for  lighting  and  paving,  under  a 
parish  act.(?()  80  it  lies  to  command  parish  officers  to  produce  the  rate- 
books and  other  books  at  the  scrutiny  of  a  poll,  which  had  been  taken  at 
the  election  of  churchwardens,  overseers,  &c.(o) 

.]  Atiditors. — The  writ  lies  to  command  churchwardens  to  assem- 
ble the  parishioners  to  elect  a  vestry  and  auditors  of  accounts  for  the 
parish,  under  a  parish  act.(p)  But  where  such  an  act  confers  a  power  of 
investigating  accounts  upon  auditors  to  be  annually  elected,  and  to  be 
summoned  by  the  vestry  clerk  at  certain  stated  intervals  to  audit  the 
accounts,  the  Court  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  to  command  the  latter, 
when  new  auditors  have  been  elected  for  the  succeeding  year,  to  call  a 
meeting  of  the  old  auditors  to  audit  the  accounts  for  the  past  year.(2) 

.]     Accounts. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  production  of  parish 

accounts,  &c.,  in  order  to  be  audited. (r) 

* .]     BooJi-s,   dr.,   Inspection. — The  writ   lies  to   allow  a 

L-l  parishioner  to  have  inspection  and  copy  of  parish  books,  they 
having  an  interest  in  them  similar  to  that  which  a  copyholder  has  in 
manor  rolls. (s)  But  an  application  by  rate-payers  for  a  mandamus  to 
give  inspection  of  parish  books  containing  entries  of  assessments  to  the 
poor  rate  and  arrears  in  the  payment  has  been  refused. (?)  So  a  parish- 
ioner has  no  right  to  inspect  parish  books  for  the  purpose  of  gaining  in- 
formation which  may  be  useful  to  him,  with  a  view  to  support  his  claim 
to  an  estate  in  the  parish,  and  therefore  the  Court  will  refuse  a  mandamus 

[I) 

oS.f 

(^  . 
See  tits.  "  Auditors"  (Parish),  "  Churchwardens, 

Officer." 

(n)  R.  V.  St.  Luke's  (Vestrymen),  2  N.  &  M.  464.1  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament" 
"  Borough,"  "  Corporation  Municipal"  (Duties). 

(0)  R.  V.  Fall,  1  G.  &  D.  118.  S.  C.  1  Q.  R.  GSCf  See  tits.  "  Church"  (Church 
Trustees),  " Corporation  Municipal"  (Duties),  "Office"  (Election),  "Overseers." 

{2})  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  3  N.  &  M.  425,t  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "Auditor," 
"Churchwardens"  (Auditor),  "Vestry." 

Iq)  In  re  St.  Giles,  &c.,  1  D.  540.     See  tit.  "  Act  of  Parliament." 

(r)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  6  A  &  E.  314.1  S.  C.  1  X.  &  P.  507,t  where  see  form  of 
wTit;  6  A.  &  E.  321t  (a).  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  3  A.  &  E.  535.1  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M. 
224,f  where  see  form  of  writ.  R.  v.  St.  Andrew's,  13  L.  J.,  X.  S.  341,  Q.  B.,  where 
see  form  of  writ.  S.  C.  6  Q.  B.  T8.f  See  tits.  "  Accounts,  Books,  &c."  "  Church- 
wardens" (Accounts),  "  County,"  "  Overseers"  (Accounts). 

(s)  Love  V.  Dr.  Bently,  11  Mod.  134,  where  the  application  was  granted  in  aid  of 
an  action  for  a  false  return  to  a  mandamus ;  in  such  a  case  the  rule  is  absolute  in 
the  first  instance.  Anon.,  2  Chit.  290.t  But  see  R.  t.  Arnold,  4  A.  &  E.  657.t 
See  tits.  "Books,"  "Company,"  "Corporation  Municipal"  (Books),  "County," 
"  Livings,"  "  Manor"  (Rolls),  "  Papers,  Official." 

[t)  R.  V.  Staffordsh.  (J.),  6  A.  &  E.  90,  102.t  R.  v.  St.  Marylebone,  5  A.  &  E. 
268.-J-     S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  600,  impugning  R.  v.  Leicester  (J.),  4  B.  &  C.  BGl.f 


PARISH.  259 

for  that  purpose. (?<)  The  right  to  inspect  parochial  documents  also  lies 
under  the  further  restriction,  that  the  applicant  must  not  claim  adversely 
to  the  parish. (r) 

.]     .     DeUveri/,  d;c. — It  has  been  held,  that  a  mandamus  will 

not  lie  to  command  ex-churchwardens  to  deliver  the  parish  books  to  their 
successors,  for  the  reason,  that  a  dispute  between  parish  officers  as  to 
which  has  a  right  to  keep  those  books,  ought  to  be  tried  at  law  upon  a 
feigned  issue. (i<;)  But  the  writ  has  since  been  granted  to  command  a 
late  overseer  to  deliver  over  parish  books  and  moneys  to  a  then  present 
overseer ;  if,  however,  such  late  overseer  be  rendered  incompetent  to  serve, 
in  consequence  of  a  conviction,  as  under  stat.  4  &  5  Wm.  4,  c.  76,  the 
application  for  the  rule  must  be  supported  by  affidavits  with  the  convic- 
tion annexed,  for  the  Court  ought  to  see  whether  there  be  a  good  convic- 
tion, (.r) 

.]     Burial  of  Parishioners. — As  to  burial  of  parishioners,  see  tit. 

Burial. 

.]    Loan,  Repayment  of. — The  writ  lies  to  command  parish  officers 

to  pay  principal  and  interest  borrowed  under  Gilbert's  Act,  22  Geo.  3, 
c.  83,  after  a  lapse  of  thirty  years,  and  no  demand  made,  the  charge  being 
by  the  act  still  in  force  ;{_y)  but  the  Court  will  not  command  a  rate  to  be 
made  for  repayment  of  such  loan,  if  neither  a  payment  nor  ^ 
provision  have  *been  made  by  the  parish  for  more  than  twenty  L  -' 
years  previously  to  the  application. (z) 

.]     Appeal. — The  writ  lies  to  enter  continuance  and  hear  an  appeal 

against  an  order  of  the  directors  of  a  parish,  for  the  payment  of  sums  due 
on  annuities  and  as  interest  on  loans. (a) 

.]  Reimbursement. — It  is  doubtful  whether  the  writ  lies  to  re- 
imburse money  over  paid  on  parish  rates,  notwithstanding  the  parish 
ought,  at  common  law,  to  make  a  rate  to  reimburse,  &c.(&) 

.]     Payment  of  money. — The  writ,  however,  lies  to  command  the 

overseers  of  a  parish  within  an  union,  to  pay  their  proportion  of  the  ex- 
penses of  the  union  to  the  treasurer,  and  that  if  they  have  not  sufficient 

(u)  R.  V.  Smallpiece,  2  Chit.  288. 

(i-)  R.  T.  Westowe  (Overseers),  1  N.  &  P.  223. f  S.  C.  5  A.  &  E.  TSG.f  Cox  v. 
Copping,  5  Mod.  396.  S.  C.  12  Vin.  Abr.  Evid.  (F.  b),  pi.  3.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  337  ; 
2  Chit.  288,f  supra.     See  tit.  "Manor"  (Rolls). 

(«•)  Ante,  p.  24.  R.  v.  Street,  8  Mod.  99.  But  see  stat.  17  Geo.  3,  c.  38,  s.  3; 
Anon.,  2  Chit.  255  ;f  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C. 

(x)  R.  V.  Simms,  4  D.  294.  R.  v.  Bletshow,  1  Bott's  P.  L.  300.  S.  C.  nom.  Puse 
V.  Clapham,  1  Wils.  305.  R.  t.  Fox,  1  W.  W.  &  H.  4.  See  tit.  "  Conviction,"  and 
ante,  p.  206,  207. 

[y)  R.  V.  Bighton  (Churchwardens),  1  N.  &  P.  775.f  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  794,  798,t  n. 
And  see  tits.  "  Church"  (Loan),  "  Loan,"  "  Money."     See  ante,  p.  18—27. 

(z)  But  see  R.  v.  St.  Paul,  Shadwell,  1  M.  &  R.  591,  and  see  tit.  "Rate." 

[a)  R.  V.  Salop  (J.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  145.f  See  tit.  "Appeal,"  "Church"  (Loan), 
"  Company,"  "  Loan,"  "  Money." 

(b)  Case  of  Parish  issues.  Comb.  257,  Eyre,  J.,  saying,  that  he  never  knew  of 
such  a  mandamus.  See  In  re  Lodge,  2  A.  &  E.  123.t  S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  312,f  nom. 
Ex  parte  Carlton  High  Dale  (Inhabs.) ;  and  tits.  "  Churchwarden,"  "  Constable," 
High"  (Reimbursement  by),  "Drainage." 


260  tapping's    mandamus. 

funds  in  their  hands  for  that  purpose,  that  they  forthwith  do  what  is  ne- 
cessary for  making,  collecting,  and  levying  a  rate  for  that  purpose,  and 
that  they  pay  the  amovint  thereof  to  the  treasurcr.(c) 

.]     Rates — The  writ  will  be  granted  to  command  the  making  a 

parish  rate  ',((1)  but  there  must  be  a  legal  duty  on  the  parish  to  make  it.(r) 
Thus  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  to  command  commissioners  en- 
trusted by  act  of  Parliament  with  the  regulation  of  the  expenditure  of  a 
parish,  to  levy  a  rate  for  the  purpose  of  paying  off  a  sum  borrowed  on  the 
credit  of  the  rates  by  former  commissioners,  without  pledging  their  per- 
sonal responsibility,  where  the  liabilities  created  under  the  former  acts  arc 
reserved  by  the  new  act ;  although  the  latter  direct  that  the  commission- 
ers shall  be  sued  in  the  name  of  their  clerk,  and  no  interest  have  been 
paid  within  twenty  years. (/) 

So  the  writ  lies  to  command  justices  to  enter  continuances  and  hear  an 
appeal  against  an  order  of  sessions,  for  amending  a  rate  made  under  the 
Parochial  Assessment  Act,  6  &  7  Wm.  4,  c.  96,  s.  6.(^) 

.     Defaulters. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  justices  to  issue 

distress  warrants  on  nonpayment  of  parish  rates. (A) 

r*9in  *Parish  Clerk.]  It  is  clearly  settled  that  the  writ  of  man- 
damns  lies  for  the  office  of  parish  clerk, (t)  because  it  is  a  temporal, 
and  not  an  ecclesiastical,  office,(y)  though  in  part  it  concerns  the  minis- 
tration of  divine  service. (/o)  It  is  both  a  freehold  office,  being  prima  facie 
an  appointment  for  life;(Z)  and  also  a  public  one,(m)  the  duties  being,  to 

(c)  R.  V.  Todmorden  (Overseers),  4  P.  &  D.  553.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  185,t  where  see 
form  of  writ,  &c.  R.  v.  St.  Andrews,  10  A.  &  E.  T36.f  See  tits.  "  Money,"  "  Poor" 
(Rate),  "  Rate." 

{d)  R.  v.  St.  Saviour's,  7  A.  &  E.  925.f  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  126.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
496.1  R.  V.  Bangor  (Overseers),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  58,  M.  C.  See  tits.  "  Poor"(Rate), 
"  Rate." 

(e)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Carpenter,  6  A.  &  E.  794.1  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  'ZTS.f  R.  v. 
Bangor  (Cliurchiwardens),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  58,  M.  C. 

(/)  R.  V.  St.  Paul,  Shadwell,  1  M.  &  R.  591.     See  tit.  "  Church." 

\g)  R.  v.  St.  Alban's  (J.),  1  P.  &  D.  148.     S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  932.f 

(A)  R.  V.  Dyer,  2  A.  &  E.  606.f  R.  v.  Huglies,  3  A.  &  E.  428.}  R.  v.  Hales,  3 
A.  &  E.  494.f  R.  V.  Mirehouse,  2  A.  &  E.  644.f  See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Jus- 
tices), and  Stat.  6  &  1  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  App.,  as  to  the  indemnity  whicli  is  thereby 
provided  for  any  matter  done  in  the  due  execution  of  a  writ  of  mandamus  ;  also  9 
&  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  8  (I). 

(i)  Ante,  p.  12.  IlA's  case,  1  Vent.  143.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  180, 
183,  n.  {b).  R.  V.  Morpeth  (Bailiffs),  Stra.  59.  R.v.  Dr.  Bland,  7  Mod.  356,  citing 
2  Roll.  Abr.  234.  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  168,  per  Twisden,  J.  Hurst's  case,  1  Lev. 
75.  Lee  v.  Drake,  2  Salk.  468  ;  but  it  was  refused  in  T.  17  Car.  1,  cited  in  Stamp's 
case,  1  Keb.  5,  and  in  R.  v.  Middleton,  1  Keb.  631,  per  Twisden,  J.,  where  it  is 
erroneously  stated  to  be  an  ecclesiastical  office. 

(j)  Say.  159,  infra.  Anon.,  1  Keb.  286,  pi.  94.  Davis's  case,  H.  4  Geo.  1,  cited 
in  Stra.  897.  Parish  Clerk's  case,  13  Rep.  70.  R.  v.  Warren,  Cowp.  370.  Leigh's 
case,  3  Mod.  335.    See  tit.  "  Office." 

Uc)  Parker  v.  Clerk,  6  Mod.  253,  per  Holt,  C.  J.     See  ante,  p.  178,  n.  (r),  (s),  {t). 

{l)  R.  V.  Ashton,  Say.  159.  Anon.,  2  Chit.  254.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  See 
tit.  "Office"  (Freehold). 

(to)  Agreed  in  Hurst's  case,  1  Lev.  75.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Public). 


PARISH     CLERK.  261 

keep  the  ornaments  of  the  church,  and  to  register  baptisms,  funerals, 
&c.(?i) 

This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 

Parish  Clerk. 
Appointment 
Admission 

Deputy 
Swear  in  -         - 

Restoration   -         -         - 

.]     Appointment. — The  writ  lies  to  command  him  who  has  the 


Parish  Clerk. 

211 

Application 

-  212 

211 

Affidavits 

-  212 

211 

Writ  (Form  of) 

-  212 

211 

Returns 

-  212 

212 

Drunkenness    - 

-  213 

right  of  appointment,  whether  by  act  of  Parliament,  custom,  &c.,  as  a 
rector,  &c.,  to  appoint  a  parish  clerk. (o) 

.]     Admission. — So  the  writ  of  mandamus  has  often  been  granted 

to  admit  to  the  office  of  parish  clerk. (p)     The  application  should  be  sup- 
ported by  an  affidavit  of  due  election. (g') 

.]     .     Deputy. — The  writ  lies  also  to  admit  a  deputy  parish 

clerk;  but  not  on  the  application  of  such  deputy. (r) 

.]     Swear  in. — So  the  writ  lies  to  swear  in  the  clerk  of  a  parish, (s) 

*duly  elected,  as  according  to  custom,  &c.(^)      In  his  duty  of  p-j.2-|^21 
swearing  in,  the  ordinary  acts  only  ministerially,  and  not  judici- 
ally, (w) 

The  writ  has  also  been  granted  to  swear  into  the  joint  offices  of  parish 
clerk  and  sexton. (v) 

.]  Restoration. — A  parish  clerk,  although  appointed  by  the  min- 
ister, has,  as  before  stated, (lo)  prima  facie  a  freehold  in  his  office,  holding 
it  quamdiu  se  bene  gesserit :  and,  therefore,  he  cannot  be  amoved  without 
legal  cause,  which  must  be  shewn  on  the  return,  in  order  to  give  the  pro- 
secutor an  opportunity  of  answering  it.     If  he  be  improperly  amoved,  a 

(n)  R.  V.  Kingscleere  (Churchwardens  of),  2  Lev.  18.     See  tit.  "  Registrar,  &c." 

(o)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  St.  Anne's  (Rector),  P.  6  Geo.  3,  Burr.  18 V8.  Com.  Dig 
tit.  "  Man."  (B.)  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Churchwarden"  (Appointment). 
"  Custom,"  "  Office"  (Appointment).  , 

[p)  R.  V.  Barker,  Burr.  1267.  Clerk  of  the  Works  case,  2  Sid.  112.  See  R.  v. 
Patrick,  2  Keb.  168,  per  Twysden,  J.,  172,  per  Keeling,  C.  J.  Speak  q.  t.  v.  Bourn, 
2  Barn.  53,  citing  2  Roll.  Abr.  285;  2  Brown.  11,  and  1  Lev.  75;  2  Lev.  18;  1 
Vent.  143,  supra  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Admission). 

{q)   2  Barn.  53,  supra.     Lee  v.  Drake,  Salk.  468.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

(/•)  Ante,  p.  12.  Parish  Clerk's  case,  Loflft,  434.  See  tits.  "Marches,"  "Office" 
(Deputy).  "Recorder"  (Deputy),  "Registrar"  (Deputy). 

(«)  Archdeacon  Chester's  case,  M.  17  Car.  1,  Rot.  31;  Latch.  123,  cited  in  Dr. 
Dolben's  case,  1  Keb.  881 :  but  in  Clerk  of  Work's  case,  2  Sid.  112,  per  Glyn,  C.  J., 
it  is  said  he  is  not  a  sworn  officer:  Anon.,  Mar.  101  ;  2  Roll.  Abr.  234,  1.  35  ;  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Swearing  in,)  and  ante,  p.  12. 

(0  Ante,  p.  12.  Clerk  of  St.  Dunstan's  case,  Comb.  105.  Orme  v.  Pemberton, 
Cro.  Car.  589,  3.     See  tit.  "  Custom." 

(m)  R.  v.  Litchfield  (Ep.),  7  Mod.  218.  S.  C.  Kely.  287,  nom.  R.  v.  Rushworth. 
See  tits.  "Churchwardens"  (Swearing  in),  "Office"  (Judicial). 

[v]  R.  V.  Smith,  1  D.  &  M.  564.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  eu.f  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S,  166, 
Q.  B.     See  tit.  "Sexton." 

[w)  Ante,  p.  211 ;  Say.  159,  supra. 


262  tapping's    mandamus. 

mandamus  will  be  granted  to  restore  him  ; (a)  and  therefore  it  is  clearly 
settled,  that  on  a  proper  case  the  writ  will  be  granted  to  restore  a  parish 
clerk,  (y) 

•]     Application  ;  Affidavits. — The  affidavits  in  support  of  the  rule 

should  show  a  clear  title  to  the  office,  that  there  is  no  plenarty,(2)  and 
that  the  applicant  has  been  removed  therefrom  ;(a)  it  would  be  well  that 
they  should  also  state  that  the  applicant  was  appointed  for  life,  though 
such  an  allegation  is  not  absolutely  necessary,(?/)  as  it  is  prima  facie  an 
office  for  life. ((•) 

.]     Writ  (^Form  of). — The  writ  of  mandamus  to  restore,  &c.  should 

be  directed  to  him  or  them  who  has  or  have  the  power  of  appointment,  as 
to  the  incumbent,  and  not  as  to  the  churchwardens,  (r/) 

.]     Returns. — A  return  to  a  mandamus  to  restore,  &c.,  will  be 

insufficient,  if  it  do  not  state  that  the  applicant  was  before  removal  sum- 
moned to  answer  the  charges  alleged  against  him.(e)  So  if  after  summons 
r*9l^l  ^'^  *attend  and  answer  a  charge  oi  intoxication,  &c.,  he  be  amoved 
upon  insufficient  evidence  of  the  intoxication,  &c,  the  Court  will 
command  his  restoration. (/) 

Parson.]  It  has  been  said,  that  a  mandamus  will  be  granted  to  com- 
mand a  bishop  to  admit  a  clerk,  where  two  patrons  diffi^r ;  and  that  it 
also  lies  to  consecrate  and  to  induct  ;(^)  but  these  dicta  seem  to  be  of 
very  questionable  authority,  for  it  has  been  expressly  held,  that  the  writ 
does  not  lie  to  restore  a  deprived  parson  to  his  living,  because  the  law  has 

{%)  R.  V.  "Warren,  Cowp.  370.  R.  v.  Davies,  9  D.  &  R.  234.f  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"  Man."  C.     See  tit.  "  OflBce"  (Restoration,  Return),  and  ante,  p.  12. 

[y]  R.  T.  Patrick,  1  Keb.  610,  and  so  agreed  in  R.  v.  Rushworth,  W.  Kely.  287. 
S.  C.  7  Mod.  217,  citing  R.  v.  Litchfield  (Ep.),  M.  1  Geo.  2.  Middleton's  case,  1 
Sid.  169.  R.  V.  Asbton,  Say.  159.  R.  v.  Argent,  Burr.  1783.  See R.  v.  Canterbury 
(Archbp.),  8  East,  218.  Davis's  case,  Hil.,  4  Geo.  1,  cited  in  R.  v.  Ward,  Stra.  897. 
R.  V.  Oxenden,  1  Show.  219,  and  cases  there  cited.  Parish  Clerk's  case,  Lolft,  434, 
5  Car.  and  18  Car.,  cited  in  The  Protector  v.  Craford,  Sty.  457.  R.  v.  Dr.  Gaskin, 
8  T.  R.  209.  Parker  v.  Clerk,  6  Mod.  253,  per  Holt,  C.  J.  And  see  R.  v.  Blooer, 
Burr.  1044.  R.  v.  Neale,  4  N.  &  M.  SeS.f  R.  v.  Smith,  1  D.  &  M.  5G4.  S.  C.  5  Q. 
B.  614.t  Anon.,  2  Chit.  254.f  Ex  parte  Cirkett,  3  D.  327.  Tarrant  v.  Haxby, 
Burr.  367.  Kid  v.  Dr.  Watkinson,  11  Mod.  221.  Anon.,  March.  101.  R.  v.  Dr. 
Wall,  11  Mod.  261.  R.  v.  Proctor,  M.  15  Geo.  3,  was  never  decided,  see  Cowp.  371, 
per  Mansfield,  C.  J.  See  R.  v.  Dr.  Asbton,  28  Geo.  2  ;  9  D.  &  R.  234,f  supra ;  and 
see  2  Sid.  112  ;  1  Vent.  143.    Bowles  v.  Neale,  7  C.  &  P.  262. 

(z)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  Parish  Clerk's  case,  Lofil:,  434.  See  tit.  "  Manor"  (Admit- 
tance), "Office"  (Election).     See  post,  tit.  "Application"  (Affidavits). 

(a)  Ex  parte  Cirkett,  3  D.  327.    See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration,  Application). 

\b)  Anon.,  2  Chit.  254.    See  post,  tit.  "Affidavits,"  "Application"  (Affidavits). 

(c)  See  ante,  p.  211,  n.  (/). 

(d)  Ex  parte  Cirkett,  3  D.  327.    See  post,  tit.  "Writ"  (Direction). 

\e)  Ante,  p.  195,  200.  R.  v.  Dr.  Gaskin,  8  T.  R.  209.  Bagg's  case,  11  Co.  99  a. 
R.  V.  Smith,  1  D.  &  M.  564.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  614,f  and  cases  there  cited.  See  tit. 
"  Office"  (Restoration,  Return). 

(/)  Ante,  p.  197.  R.  v.  Neale,  4  N.  &  M.  868.1  As  to  a  return  of  amoval  for 
intoxication,  see  R.  v.  Warren,  Cowp.  370.  Tarrant  v.  Haxby,  Burr.  367.  See  R. 
V.  Smith,  1  D.  &  M.  564.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  614,f  where  see  form  of  return.  As  to  a 
return  of  Drunkenness,  see  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration,  Return). 

{g)  Dr.  Robert's  case,  2  Keb.  103,  per  Keeling,  C.  J.     See  tit.  "  Curate  Livings." 


PATENT.  263 

provided  other  specific  remedies,  one  of  wliich  is  by  quaere  impedit.(/t) 
So  it  has  been  held,  that  if  the  right  of  nomination  be  in  one  party,  and 
that  of  presentation  in  another,  and  either  impede  the  other  in  his  right, 
a  quare  impedit  lies ;  and  therefore  a  mandamus  will  in  such  case  be 
refused,  (i) 

It  has  been  held,  that  an  officer  upon  a  corrupt  contract  against  stat. 
Edw.  6,  or  guilty  of  simony,  cannot  be  amoved  by  mandamus. (J) 

.]     Salary. — The  writ  has,  however,  been  granted  to  command 

churchwardens  to  pay  to  the  prosecutor  the  arrears  of  his  salary,  to  which 
he  was  entitled  by  a  local  act,  to  be  paid  out  of  the  church  rate,  for  his 
services  as  clergyman,  in  the  performance  of  certain  duties  within  the 
parish. (/i)  So  it  has  been  granted  to  command  a  municipal  corporation 
to  secure  by  bond  under  the  corporate  seal  the  stipend  of  a  minister  or 
lecturer,  duly  entitled  under  stat.  5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  76,  s.  68.(/) 

.]     Bwial. — As  to  burial,  see  that  title,  and  title  Corpse. 

.]     Livings — As   to   inspection   of  register  of  livings,  see  tit. 

Livings. 

.]   Tithe. — As  to  tithe,  see  that  title,  and  title  Modus. 

Patent.]  The  writ  does  not  lie  to  enforce  a  contract  arising  out  of  a 
patent  right.  Thus,  in  a  patent  for  an  invention,  it  was  stipulated  that 
the  patentee  should  supply  his  Majesty's  service  with  so  much  of  the 
invented  article  as  should  be  required,  on  such  reasonable  prices  and 
terms  as  should  be  settled  for  that  purpose  by  the  Admiralty.  The 
patentee  allowed  the  articlj  to  be  made  at  the  royal  dock  yards,  |-^(),  .-, 
and  at  the  request  of  the  Navy  *Board,  gave  instructions  for  the  L  "  -I 
guidance  of  the  smiths  there,  without  recompense  for  the  use  of  the 
patent.  The  Court  held,  that  a  mandamus  did  not  lie  to  command  the 
Admiralty  to  settle  the  terms  and  fix  a  price  to  be  paid  to  the  patentee, 
it  not  being  within  the  terms  of  the  patent ;  for  such  a  mandamus  would 
be  a  sort  of  quantum  meruit  for  the  use  of  the  patent  ;(??i)  and  that  as 
not  only  debts,(?i)  but  unliquidated  damage,(o)  may  be  recovered  at  com- 

(h)  Ante,  p.  26.  R.  v.  Barker,  1  W.  Blac.  352.  S.  C.  Burr.  1265.  Ken's  case, 
cited  in  R.  v.  Patrick,  1  Keb.  835.  See  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.  Comb.  281.  R.  v. 
Blooer,  Burr.  1045.  See  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  168,  per  Twisden,  J.  See  tits. 
"  Curate,"  "  Dissenters,"  "  Prebendary." 

[i)  Ante,  p.  26.  R.  v.  Stafford  (Marquis),  3  T.  R.  646  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man." 
(B.) 

(/)  R.  V.  St.  John's,  Cambridge,  Comb.  281.     See  tit.  "Office"  (Removal). 

{k)  Ex  parte  Scott,  8  D.  328.  See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "Contract," 
"Money." 

{I)  R.  V.  Liverpool  (Mayor),  3  N.  &  P.  280.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  l'76.t  See  tit. 
"  Compensation"  (Office). 

(to)  Ante,  p.  18,  19,  20.  Ex  parte  Perring,  6  N.  &  M.  4(7.t  S.  C.  4  A.  &  E. 
949-1     See  tits.  "Contract,"  "  Money." 

(n)  M.  11,  H.  4,  fo.  28,  pi.  53.     See  tit.  "Crown."     Ante,  p.  11,  n.  (o),  20. 

(o)  Gerveis  de  Clifton's  case,  P.  22,  E.  3,  fo.  5,  pi.  12  (for  damages  done  by  the 
wardens  of  Nottingham  Castle  in  Cutting  trenches  in  the  Trent  for  four  new  mills 
built  by  the  king).     See  ante,  p.  11,  20,  21. 


264  tapping's    mandamus. 

Tuon  law  against  the  Crown  by  petition  of  right, Q;)  so  therefore,  unless 
this  complete  and  ordinary,  though  not  very  usual  remedy  be  taken  away 
by  the  patent,  &c.,  the  applicant  is  not  entitled  to  avail  himself  of  the 
extraordinary  remedy  by  mandamus. (5-) 

Pavements.]     See  titles  iZi^/iwa^;  Parish-,  Paving  Rate  ;  Way. 

Paving  Rate.] — See  titles  Borough;  Parish  {Election)-,  Rate. 

Peace,  Articles  of  the.]  Taking,  &c. — The  writ  lies  to  command 
justices  to  take  recognizances  to  articles  of  the  peace,  whether  they  be 
exhibited  at  sessions,  &c.,  or  in  the  Court  of  B.  R.  And  such  Court  will, 
at  the  instance  of  a  defendant,  if  he  be  in  a  very  infirm  state  of  health, 
command  such  justices  to  attend  him  for  that  purpose. (r) 

But  where  a  recognizance  has  been  removed  into  the  Court  of  B.  R. 
for  the  purpose  of  being  estreated,  such  Court  will  not,  for  the  further- 
ance of  the  liberty  of  the  subject,  grant  a  mandamus  to  the  justices  to 
correct  a  clerical  error  vitiating  the  recognizance. (.s) 

Peace,  Clerk  of.]  AjyjJointment. — The  writ  lies  for  a  clerk  of  the 
peace,  he  being  appointed  by  the  custos  rotulorum  under  stats.  37  Hen. 
8,  c.  1,  and  1  W.  &  M.  c.  21,  s.  5,  for  life,  (quamdiu  se  bene  gesserit), 
therefore  the  office  does  not  become  void  on  the  custos  being  removed,  nor 
can  a  succeeding  custos  at  his  pleasure  remove  a  clerk  appointed  by  a 
preceding  custos.  (t) 

r*2151      '-I     ^Admission. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  an  admis- 
sion to  the  office  of  clerk  of  the  peace. (m) 

.]     Restoration.'} — The  writ  also  lies  to  restore  a  clerk  of  the 

peace,  if  he  have  been  improperly  removed  from  his  office,(t')  whether  by 

(p)  Mann.  Exch.  Pra.,  2nd  edit.  84.  See  tit.  "  Manor"  (Royal  Manor),  and  ante> 
p.  154,  n.  {x). 

(q)  See  ante,  p.  18,  19,  and  tit.  "  Manor"  (Admittance).  H.  2,  E.  3,  fo.  18,  pi.  2  ; 
Fitzg.  Abr.  tit.  "Age,"  pi.  75,  tit.  "  Dette,"  pi.  17,  tit.  "  Graunt,  pi.  7,  tit.  "  Peti- 
cion,"  pi.  8,  10,  5,  tit.  "  Travers,"  pi.  43,  150,  163,  164,  and  see  Ex  parte  Pering, 
6  N.  &  M.  477,t  n.  (a) ;  and  tit.  "  Execution." 

(r)  R.  V.  Lewis,  1  Barn.  166.  S.  C.  Stra.  855.  -S.  C.  Fitzg.  85.  Seymour's  case 
there  cited,  and  Reynolds,  J.,  remembered  a  Northumberland  case  in  which  it  was 
also  done.  Fitzg.  85,  pi.  13;  2  Sess.  Ca.  68,  pi.  2;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) ; 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  But  see  R.  v.  Bushfield,  2  Sess.  Ca.  67.  See  tit.  "  Quar- 
ter Sessions"  (Justices). 

(s)  Ante,  p.  17,  n.  (>/).  R.  v.  Stack,  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  58,  M.  C.  See  tits.  "  Pri- 
soner," "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Records). 

{()  R.  V.  Evans,  1  Show.  282.  S.  C.  Holt,  188  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  Har- 
court  V.  Fox,  1  Show.  426,  3rd  edit.  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (C.)  See  tits.  "  Act  of 
Parliament,"  "  Custos  Rotulorum,"  "  Office"  (Public,  Freehold). 

{u)  See  p.  12.     R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  Say,  144.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Admission). 

(v)  Ante,  p.  12.  Harcourt  v.  Fox,  1  Show.  426.  S.  C.  506,  556.  S.  C.  4  Mod. 
167.  S.  C.  Comb.  209.  S.  C.  Show.  P.  C.  158.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  42.  S.  C.  Holt, 
188,  189.  R.  V.  Evans,  1  Show.  282.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  31.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  13.  S.  C. 
Holt,  188.  R.  v.  Baines,  6  Mod.  193;  4  Com.  Dig.  154.  Owen  v.  Saunders,  Ld. 
Raym.  158,  161.     See  tit.  "Office"  (Restoration). 


PENSION.     •  265 

the  custos  rotulorum,  or  not.(?^;)  Thus  the  custos  cannot  remove  a  clerk 
of  the  peace,  upon  the  ground  that  a  demand  has  been  made  of  the 
county  rolls,  and  he  did  not  deliver  them :  for  the  clerk  of  the  peace  is  a 
distinct  officer,  and  not  a  mere  servant,  and  his  business  is  to  make  up 
the  rolls,  and  to  enter  them ;  also  a  clerk  of  the  peace  is  not  removable, 
bat  for  a  misdemeanor,  or  higher  offence. (x)  So  the  writ  to  restore,  &c., 
will  be  granted,  if  he  be  improperly  removed  by  the  justices  at  Quarter 
Sessions. (?/)  Thus,  where  a  clerk  of  the  peace  had  been  dismissed  by  the 
sessions,  no  charge  in  writing  having  been  made  against  him,  and  exhib- 
ited, as  directed  by  stat.  1  Wm.  &  M.  c.  21,(2)  the  Court  awarded  a  writ 
for  his  restoration. 

But  although  the  appointment  of  '^  clerk  of  the  peace,"  under  stat.  1 
Wm.  &  M.  c.  21,  must  be  "quamdiu  se  bene  gesserit;"  yet  if  he  be 
appointed  "durante  bene  placito,"  of  the  custos;  the  Court,  on  his  depri- 
vation, will  not  grant  a  mandamus  to  restore  him ;  for  his  appointment 
being  void,  he  cannot  shew  title  to  the  office. (a) 

Pension.]  If  public  officers,  as  the  lords  of  the  treasury,  have  the 
custody  of  money  for  a  specific  purpose,  as  for  the  payment  of  a  pension, 
&c.,  and  do  not  fulfil  that  purpose,  a  mandamus  will  be  granted,  com- 
manding them  so  to  do.  Thus  the  Court  has  granted  a  mandamus  to 
command  the  lords  of  the  treasury  forthwith  to  issue  a  treasury  minute 
or  authority  to  the  paymaster  of  civil  contingencies,  or  other  proper  offi- 
cer, directing  and  authorizing  him  to  pay  the  amount  or  arrears  of  a 
retired  allowance  to  a  public  officer,  under  stat.  3  G-eo.  4,  c.  113,  it  hav- 
ing been  voted  by  Parliament,  and  the  *mouey  for  the  payment  r^Q^g-i 
thereof  being  in  the  treasury  for  his  benefit ;  for  the  claimant  has 
no  other  remedy,  and  the  writ  in  such  a  case  is  not  against  the  Crown, (i) 
but  against  officers  into  whose  hands  money  has  been  paid  under  an  act 
of  Parliament,  for  the  use  of  an  individual ;  they  being  protected(c)  from 
an  action((^)  for  the  recovery  thereof.     If,  however,  it  should  be,  on  any 

(w)  Harcourt  v.  Fox;  R.  v.  Evans,  supra.  Sanders  v.  Owen,  5  Mod.  387.  S.  C 
Carth.  426.     S.  C.  2  Salk.  467.     S.  0.  Holt,  190 ;  4  Mod.  293,  295. 

(a;)  R.  v^  Evans,  12  Mod.  13.  S.  C.  Holt,  188.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  31.  S.  C.  1  Show. 
282.     See  tits.  "County"  (Records),  "Custos,"  "Office"  (Restoration,  Returns). 

{y)  R.  V.  Evans,  4  Mod.  31.  R.  v.  Lloyd,  Stra.  997.  See  stat.  1  W.  &  M.  c.  21, 
as  to  clerks  of  the  peace. 

(z)  R.  V.  Evans,  1  Show.  282,  and  n.  {b).  S.  C.  Holt,  188.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  31,  n. 
(a).  S.  C.  12  Mod.  13.  See  Harcourt  v.  Fox,  1  Show.  427,  &c.;  6  Mod.  192.  R. 
V.  Lloyd,  Stra.  996,  997,  Saunders  v.  Owen,  5  Mod.  386.  S.  0.  Carth.  426.  S. 
C.  Comb.  317.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  467.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  158,  166;  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."  (A.).     See  tit.  "Office"  (Restoration). 

{a)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Owen,  4  Mod.  293.  S.  C.  Comb.  317.  See  1  Show. 
282,  n.  {b).     See  tit.  "Office"  (Restoration).     Ante,  p.  191,  192,  n.  (c). 

{b)  Ante,  p.  18.  See  tits.  "  Acts  of  Parliament,"  "  Crown,"  "  Manor"  (Royal 
Manor),  "  Money,"  "  Treasury  Lords." 

(c)  Gidley  v.  Ld.  Palmerston,  3  B.  &  B.  275.1 

[d]  Ante,  p.  20.  R.  v.  Treasury  (Lords),  4  A.  &  E.  2S6.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M. 
589. f     See  tits.  "Half-pay,"  "Treasury  Lords." 


266  tapping's    mandamus. 

occasion  unsafe,  with  reference  to  the  public  service,  to  make  a  payment 
of  this  kind,  the  fact  may  be  stated  on  the  return. (r;)  But  whore  the 
lords  of  the  treasury  have  a  discretionary  power,  as  that  of  revoking  a 
minute  by  which  they  have  granted  a  pension  or  superannuation  allow- 
ance, under  stat.  3  Geo.  4,  c.  113,  upon  the  retirement  of  the  grantee 
from  an  office  held  during  the  pleasure  of  the  Crown,  there  a  mandamus 
to  restore  such  a  treasury  minute  revoked  by  them,  or  to  submit  a  vote 
to  Parliament  in  the  estimates  for  the  grant  of  it,(/)  will  be  refused. 
Also  where  the  Court  for  the  lelief  of  Insolvent  Debtors,  under  stat.  1 
&  2  Vict.  c.  110,  s.  56,  had  made  an  order  for  the  payment  of  a  certain 
portion  of  an  insolvent's  pension  to  his  assignees,  and  had  required  the 
Commissioners  of  Excise,  by  whom  it  was  payable,  to  consent  to  such 
order,  but  who  had  refused,  the  Court  declined  to  grant  a  mandamus  to 
command  them  so  to  do,  because  they  have  a  discretionary  power  to  con- 
fer or  withhold  their  consent. (^) 

Permit.]     See  titles  Certijicafe ;  Excise  (Commissioners ;)  Sldj). 

Perpetual  Curates.]     See  tit.  Curate  {Perpetual  Curacy.) 

Petty  Sessions.]  See  titles  Courts  Inferior ;  Quarter  Sessions  {Petty.) 

Physicians,  College  of.]  Duty,  &c.  to  Examine. — A  writ  of  man- 
damus does  not  lie  to  command  the  president  and  college  or  commonalty 
of  physic  in  London,  to  examine  as  to  qualification  and  fitness,  in  order 
to  admission  into  such  corporation,  as  a  member  or  fellow  thereof,(7<)  it 
being  a  society  formed  spontaneously  by  certain  individuals,  and  like  to 
the  Inns  of  Court,  which  are  perfectly  voluntary  societies  ;(<)  nor  wil 
the  Court  of  B.  Pi.  interfere  by  mandamus,  with  the  discretion  of  the 
College  of  Physicians. (y) 

^,^^      * .]     Admission. — Nor  does  the  writ  lie  to  command  the 

r*2171 

L  "     -■  admission  of  one  to  be  a  member  of  the  fellows  and  licentiates  of 

the  College  of  Physicians. (7i;)     So  it  does  not  lie  to  command  the  College 

(e)  A.  &  E.  295.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  589,f  supra.  See  The  Banker's  case,  S. 
C.  R.  V.  Hornby,  5  Mod.  29.  S.  C.  14  How.  St.  Tr.  1,  and  4  A.  &  E.  996.t  S. 
C.  6  N.  &  M.  508.t 

(/)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Treasury  (Lords),  4  A.  &  E.  976.f  S.  C.  6  N.  &  M. 
505.t  And  see  R.  v.  Treasuri^  (Lords),  6  N.  &  M.  SOS.f  S.  C.  4  A.  &  E.  984.f 
S.  C.  2  H.  &  W.  67.  Ex  parte  Ricketts,  4  A.  &  E.  lOOl.f  See  tits.  "Alehouse" 
(License),  "  Discretion." 

{g)  Ante,  p.  12.  In  re  Howard,  2  D.  &  L.  753.  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  113,  Q.  B. 
See  tits.  "Half-pay,"  "Insolvent." 

(A)  R.  V.  Physicians'  (Coll.),  7  T.  R.  282,  290,  295,  n.  (a).  See  tits.  "  College" 
(Admission),  "Inn  of  Court"  (Admission). 

{i)  2  Show.  178.     See  tits.     "Inn  of  Court,"  "Visitor.' 

{j)  Ante,  p.  12—15 ;  7  T.  R.  291,  supra.  See  tits.  "Discretion,"  "Lectureship," 
(License). 

[k]  Dr.  Askew's  case,  Burr.  2186.  See  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  398.  R.  v. 
Physicians'  Coll.,  2  Show.  178.     Dr.  Goddard's  case,  1  Lev.  19.      S.  C.  1  Sid.  29 


POOR. 


267 


of  Physicians  to  admit  a  London  licentiate  into  their  fellowship  ;(/)  nor 
as  an  honorary  fellow  of  that  college  ;(?n)  it  not  being  a  place  of  profit, 
nor  advantageous  to  the  holder,  nor  docs  it  in  the  least  relate  to  public 
government,  (n) 

.]     Restoration. — It  has  also  been  held  that   the  writ  does  not 

lie  to  restore  to  the  fellowship  of  such  college. (o) 

.]     License. — Nor  will  a  mandamus  lie  to  command  the  granting 

of  a  license  to  practise  physic,  although  improperly  refused,  for  the  Court 
of  B.  R.  has  no  jurisdiction. (j>) 

Plaint.]     See  titles  Courts  Inferior  (Plaint);  Mayior  (Lect,  Plaint). 

Poor.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


Poor. 

Relief 

Maintenance 

Removal 

Appeal 

Case 
Apprentice     - 
Poor  rate. 
Making 

Application 

Rule 

Form  of  Writ 


Poo  RATE — Signing, 

allowing, 

&c.     221 

217 

Rule 

- 

- 

-  222 

217 

Appeal  against  rule 

- 

-  222 

218 

Collecting  rate 

- 

- 

-  223 

218 

Rate  Books    - 

- 

- 

-  223 

219 

Inspection 

- 

- 

-  223 

219 

Delivery- 

- 

- 

-  223 

Defaulters 

- 

- 

-  223 

220 

Application 

- 

- 

-  225 

221 

Rule 

- 

- 

-  225 

221 

Reimbursement 

- 

- 

-  225 

221 

Poor  Law  Commissioners 

-  225 

.]     Relief;  Maintenance. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  guar- 
dians, &c.  of  a  parish  to  relieve  the  poor;(5)  also  to  command  overseers 
to  receive  *into  the  workhouse,  or  otherwise  provide  for,  the  neces- 
sary  relief  and  support  of  a  casual  pauper,  (r)  ^         -' 

It  lies  also  to  command  justices  to  hear  a  complaint  by  overseers  against 
an  individual,  for  refusing  to  maintain  his  wife  and  child. (.s)  But  it  does 
not  lie  to  command  magistrates  to  make  an   order  of  maintenance  on  a 

S.  C.  1  Keb.  75,  84;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."   (A.  B.)  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.  3. 
See  tit.  "  College"  (Admission). 

{I)  R.  V.  Physicians'  (Coll.),  Burr.  2740,  and  cases  there  cited.  Formerly,  how- 
ever, the  Court  granted  the  writ  to  swear  into  such  office.  Anon.  12  Mod.  666,  per 
Holt,  C.  J.  Dr  Goddard's  case,  1  Sid.  29.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  19.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  75,  84. 
R.  V.  Coll.  of  Physicians,  2  Show.  178. 

(m)  R.  V.  Physicians'  (Coll.),  2  Show.  178,  sometimes  cited  as  Dr.  Merrit's  case. 
See  also  R.  v.  Alsop,  2  Show.  170.    Dr.  Goddard's  case,  1  Sid.  29.    S.  C.  1  Lev.  19. 

(n)  See  R.  v.  Askew,  Burr.  2186.     See  tit.  "Office"  (Public). 

(o)  Dr.  Goddard's  case,  1  Sid.  29.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  19.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  75,  84,  recog- 
nised in  R.  V.  Middleton,  1  Keb.  625;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.  B.) ;  Trem.  PI. 
Cor.  495,  where  see  a  form  of  writ ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  0.  2.  See  tit.  "  College" 
(Fellow). 

(j?)  Dr.  Askew's  case,  Burr.  2189.    See  tits. 

{q)  Ante,  p.  12.     R.  v.  Totness  Union,  7  Q.  _. ,      -.  _- 

M.  C.     See  tits.  "  Guardians"  (Duties,  &c.),  "  Office"  (Enforcing  Duty) 

(r)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  7  A.  &  E.  751.f  S.  C.  5  D.  722.  The  rule  is  absolute  in 
the  first  instance.     See  tits.  "  Corpse,"  "  Lunatic." 

(s)  R.  V.  Cumberland  (J.),  4  A.  &  E.  695.f  See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Jus- 
tices). 


Lectureship"  (License),  "License." 
"    690.f     S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  148, 


268  tapping's   mandamus. 

particular  person  or  parish. (/)  The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  church- 
wardens of  one  parish,  to  pay  those  of  another,  the  costs  of  maintaining  a 
pauper,  previously  to  his  removal. (m)  So  it  lies  to  command  a  justice  to 
back  a  warrant  of  distress,  issued  by  magistrates,  for  the  costs  of  a  pauper's 
support,  during  the  suspension  of  an  order  of  removal,  in  pursuance  of 
Stat.  35  Geo.  3,  c.  101,  s.  2,(y)  and  the  Court  will  command  sessions  to 
hear  an  appeal  as  to  the  costs  of  such  maintenance. (if) 

.]     Removal;  Appeal. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  Quarter 

Sessions,  to  enter  continuances,  and  hear  an  appeal  against  an  order  of 
removal,  which  they  have  improperly,  for  any  cause,  refused  to  hear,  (a) 

{t)  R.  V.  Mkldlx.  (J.),  4  B.  &  A.  298,  300  ;t  and  see  4  B.  &  A.  271  ;t  3  B.  &  A. 
590  ;t  and  Anon.,  2  Chit.  257.  See  infra,  "Office"  (Officers  Judicial),  "Rate" 
(Making). 

(m)  R.  t.  Nottingham  (J.),  2  Barn.  56;  and  see  R.  v.  Monmouth  (J.),  12  L.  J., 
N.  S.  126,  M.  C. ;  but  see  R.  v.  Radnorsh.  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  151,  M.  C.  See  tits. 
"Bastards"  (Costs),  "Lunatic,"  "Money." 

[v)  R.  V.  Kynaston,  1  East,  116. 

[w)  Ante,  p.  147,  n.  (A).  R.  v.  Monmouthsh.,  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  126,  M.  C.  R.  v. 
Anglesea  (J.),  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  131,  M.  C.     See  tits.  "  Costs"'  "  Lunatic." 

{z)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Yorksh.  (J.),  3  T.  R.  150.  R.  v.  Monmouthsh.  (.J.),  1  B. 
&  Ad.  895.f  R.  V.  Southampton  (J.),  6  M.  &  S.  394.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  4  M. 
&  S.  327.  R.  T.  Surrey  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  480.  R.  v.  Buckinghamsh.  (J.),  3  East,  342. 
R.  Y.  Suffolk  (J.),  6  A.  &  E.  lOO.f    S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  306.f    R.  v.  Northamptonsh.  (J.). 

6  A.  &  E.  lll.f  R.  V.  Shropsh.  (J.),  7  East,  549.  R.  v.  Wiltsh.  (J.),  10  East,  406, 
R.  V.  Wiltsh.  (J.),  1  East,  683.     R.  v.  Sussex  (J.),  7  T.  R.  107.     R.  v.  Flintsh,  (J.), 

7  T.  R.  200.  R.  v.  Yorksh.  (J.),  1  Doug.  193.  R.  v.  Gloucestersh.  (J.),  1  Doug.  191. 
R.  V.  Frieston  (Inhabs.),  5  B.  &  Ad.  598.1  R.  v.  Lancash.  (J.),  7  B.  &  C.  692. f  R. 
V.  Suffolk  (J.),  4  A.  &  E.  319.t  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  503.f  R.  v.  Cornwall  (J.),  5  A.  & 
E.  134.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  144-1  R.  v.  Kelvedon  (J.),  5  A.  &  E.  690.t  R.  v.  Kim- 
bolton  (Inhabs.),  6  A.  &  E.  604.t  R.  v.  Derbysh.  (J.),  6  A.  &  E.  885.t  S.  C.  1  N. 
&  P.  148,t  u.  [a).  R.  V.  Warwicksh.  (J.),  6  A.  &  E.  873.t  S,  C.  2  N.  &  P.  153.t 
R.  V.  Cornwall  (J."),  6  A.  &  E.  894.f  Ex  parte  Brosely  (Inhabs.),  7  A.  &  E.  423.f 
S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  355.  R.  V.  Sussex  (J.),  10  A.  &  E.  684.t  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  42.  R. 
V.  Bridgewater  (Inhabs.),  10  A.  &  E.  694.f  R.  v.  Whitley  Upper  (Inhabs.)  11  A. 
&  E.  90.t     R.  V.  Ecclesall,  11  A.  &  E.  612.t     R.  v.  Chesh.  (J.),  8  D.  616,  and  see 

1  P.  &  D.  88.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  398.t  R.  v.  Herefordsh.  (J.),  8  D.  638.  R.  v.  Mid- 
dlesex (J.),  9  D.  163.     R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  2  D.,  N.  S.  708.     R.  v.  Stafifordsh., 

2  D.,  N.  S.  353.  R.  v.  Salop  (J.),  3  N.  &  P.  286.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  173.J  R.  v. 
Derbysh.  (J.),  3  N.  &  P.  591.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  P.  &D.  462.  R.  v.  Mon- 
mouthsh. (J.),  3  D.  306.  R.  V.  Leicester  (J.),  4  D.  633.  R.  v.  Norfolk  (J.),  1  D. 
&  R.  69,  74,  75.f  S.  C.  5  B.  &  A.  484 ;t  2  Nolan,  142.  R.  v.  Suffolk  (J.),  1  D. 
103.  R.  V.  Stafifordsh.  (J.),  1  D.  484.  R.  v.  Gloucestersh.  (J.),  3  D.  298.  R.  v. 
Lindsay  (J.),  6  M.  &  S.  379.     R.  v.  Caermarthensh.  (J.),  4  B.  &  Ad.  563.t     S.  C. 

1  N.  &  M.  368.t  R.  T.  York  (J.),  2  B.  &  C.  77l.t  R-  v.  Kent  (J.),  8  B.  &  C. 
639.  R.  V.  Devon  (J.),  8  B.  &  C.  640,t  n.  {a).  R.  v.  Herefordsh.  (J.),  3  T.  R.  504. 
R.  V.  Derbysh.  (J.),  4  T.  R.  488.  R.  v.  Norfolk  (J.),  3  N.  &  M.  55.f  R.  v.  Mon- 
mouthsh. (J.),  7  D.  &  R.  334,f  where  see  form  of  rule.  R.  v.  Salop  (J.),  6  D.  28. 
R.  V.  Norwich  (J.),  5  B.  &  A.  484.f     R.  v.  Devon  (J.),  1  Chit.  34.     R.  v.  Essex  (J,), 

2  Chit.  385.f  R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.),  3  P.  &  D.  459.  R.  v.  Salop  (J.),  R.  v.  Lancast. 
(J.),  R.  v.  Suffolk  (J.),  1  G.  &  D.  146.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  85.1  R.  v.  Kent  (J.),  2  G.  & 
D.  152.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  686.t  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  27,  M.  C.  B.  v.  West  Riding  (J.;, 
2  Q.  B.  505.t  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  706 ;  1  G.  &  D.  630.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  705.t  R.  v. 
Carnarvonsh.  (J.),  1  G.  &  D.  423.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  325.1  R.  v.  Lancash.  (J.),  2  G. 
&  D.  714.  Ex  parte  Pontefract  (Churchwardens),  3  G.  &  D.  188.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B. 
391.f  R.  v.  Lancash.  (J.),  3  G.  &  D.  296.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  910.f  R.  v.  Middlesex 
(J.),  4  Q.  B.  807.t  S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  134,  M.  C.  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  1  D.  &  M. 
106.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  506,  508.t  R.  v.  Kesteven  (J.),  1  D.  &  M.  113.  R.  v.  Merion- 
ethsh.  (J.),  1  D.  &  M.  121.  S.  C.  6  Q.  B.  163.}  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  114,  M.  C. 
R.  V.  Lancash.  (J.),  1  D.  &  M.  488.     R.  v.  Denbighsh.  9  D.  509.     R.  v.  Chesh.  (J.), 


POOR.  269 

*Also  to  command  a  recorder  to  enter  continuances  and  hcarp^rt-in-i 
such  an  appeal. (?/) 

The  writ  also  lies  to  command  justices  to  receive  a  complaint  against 
the  overseers  and  churchwardens  of  a  parish,  for  refusing  to  pay  the  costs 
of  an  appeal,  on  an  order  of  removal. (a) 

.      Case. — 'The  writ  also  lies  to  command  the  Quarter  Sessions  to 

state  a  special  case  for  the  opinion  of  the  Court,  pursuant  to  an  order  of 
sessions,  made  on  the  hearing  of  an  appeal  against  an  order  of  removal. (a) 
But  not  where  it  is  clear  that  such  a  proceeding  could  lead  to  no  useful 
result;  as  where  the  chairman,  in  consequence  of  his  own  opinion,  and 
that  of  the  Court,  upon  the  facts,  refused  to  sign  any  statement,  but  one 
which  would  have  excluded  the  point  of  law  relied  upon  by  the  party 
demanding  the  case;  but  under  such  circumstances,  the  Court  will  com- 
mand them  to  enter  continuances,  and  hear  the  appeal. (Z^) 

-.]     Apprentice. — The  writ  lies  to  command  justices  to   consider 

and  determine  whether  there  exists  any  objection  to  the  allowance  of  the 
indenture  of  apprenticeship  of  a  pauper. (c)  But  it  will  not  be  granted  to 
^command  parish  officers,  appellants  against  an  order  of  removal,  r^oon-i 
to  produce  the  indenture  of  the  apprenticeship  of  a  pauper,  sworn 
to  be  in  their  custody,  at  the  instance  of  the  prosecutors  (respondents),  in 
order  that  an  assignment  thereon  indorsed,  may  be  stamped,  so  as  to  be 
evidence  on  the  hearing  of  the  appeal,  although  the  indenture  be  the  deed 
of  and  between  the  parties  named  in  the  rule  for  the  writ ;  because  such 
an  indenture  is  not  a  public  document.((^) 

.]     Rate  ;  MaMng. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  churchwardens 

of  a  parish,  or  some  of  them,  to  concur  with  the  overseers  in  making  a 

1  D.,  N.  S.  570.  R.  V.  Staffordsh.  (J.),  2  D.,  N.  S.  353.  R.  v.  Anglesea  (J.),  1  D. 
&  L.  170.  Ex  parte  Harnley  (Overs.),  1  D.  &L.  GTS.  R.  v.  Flintsh.  (J.),  2  D.  &  L. 
143.  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  163,  M.  C.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  2  D.  &  L.  488.  R. 
V.  Essex  (J.),  1  B.  &  A.  210.f  R.  v.  Derbysh.  (J.),  6  A.  &  E.  612.1  R.  y.  West 
Rid.  (J.),  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  37.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  119,  M.  C.  S. 
C.  3  D.  &  L.  152.  Ex  parte  Pontefract  (Inhabs.),  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  5,  M.  C.  R.  v. 
Warwicksh.  (J.),  6  Q.  B.  T52.f  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  46,  M.  C.  S.  C. 
3  D.  &  L.  573.  R.  v.  Middx.  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  100,  M.  C.  R.  t.  Montgomerysh. 
(J.),  3  D.  &  L.  119.  R.  V.  Middx.  (J.),  3  D.  &  L.  745.  R.  v.  Suffolk  (J.),  16  L.  J., 
N.  S.  36,  M.  C.  R.  V.  Staffordsh.  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  53,  M.  C.  R.  \.  Somersetsli. 
(J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  86,  M.  C.  R.  v.  Durham  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  112,  M.  C.  R.  t. 
Middx.  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  135,  M.  C.  See  tits.  "  Courts  Inferior"  (Appeal),  "  Quar- 
ter Sessions"  (Appeal). 

(y)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Bath  (Rec),  1  P.  &  D.  469.  S.  C.  9  A.  &  E.  7l4.t  R.  v. 
Pontefract  (R.),  2  Q.  B.  548.t  S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  700.  S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  81,  M. 
C.     See  tits.  "  Office"  (Enforcing  Duty),  "  Recorder." 

(z)  Ante,  p.  218,  n.  (s).  R.  v.  Long,  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  124,  M.  C.  Sec  tits.  "Costs," 
"  Mandamus,"  p.  148,  n.  [i). 

(a)  R.  V.  Pcmbrokesh.  (J.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  391. f  R.  v.  Effingham,  2  B.  &  Ad.  393,f 
n.  (a).     See  ante,  p.  11. 

(b)  Ante,  p.  15,  16  ;  2  B.  &  Ad.  392,f  supra.  See  tits.  "Courts  Inferior"  (Case), 
"  Quarter  Sessions"  (Case). 

(c)  R.  y.  Mills,  2  B.  &  Ad.  578.f  See  tits.  "  Apprentice,"  "  Freedom"  (Com- 
pany, &c..  Admission),  and  ante,  p.  12 — 15. 

(d)  Ante,  p.  9,  10.  R.  v.  Westowe  (Overseers),  5  A.  &  E.  YSG.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
222.t     See  tits.  "  Papers,  Official." 


270  tapping's    mandamus. 

ratc.(f)  Bat  not  without  first  appealing  to  the  sessions,  if  such  a  course 
be  open  to  the  parties. (/) 

The  writ  has  also  been  granted  to  command  justices  to  tax,  rate,  and 
assess  a  parish  to  the  support  of  the  poor,  under  stat.  43  Eliz.  c.  2,  s. 
3.(^)  The  rate  must,  however,  be  a  legal  one;  and  therefore  the  writ 
does  not  lie  to  command  justices  to  rate  a  parish  within  their  jurisdiction, 
in  aid  of  another  parish  having  exclusive  jurisdiction  ;(/(,)  nor  to  command 
the  making  of  a  monthly  rate  for  the  relief  of  the  poor,  the  rates  being 
then  made  quarterly. (i)  Nor  will  the  writ  be  issued  to  make  an  equal 
rate, (J)  unless  the  statute  upon  which  the  application  is  made,  so  direct 
it.(^)  Nor  does  the  writ  lie  to  exempt  from  a  rate  persons  who  ought  not 
to  be  rated.  (?)  Nor  to  direct  the  insertion  of  the  names  of  particular  per- 
r^noi-isons,  although  it  *be  deposed  that  such  names  were  left  out  to 
prevent  votes  for  Parliament;  the  remedy  being  by  appeal ;  for 
the  Court  never  interferes  further  than  to  oblige  the  making  of  a  rate, 
without  meddling  with  the  question,  who  is  to  be  put  in  or  left  out  ?  of 
which  the  parish  offices  are  the  proper  judges,  subject  to  an  appeal. (m) 

The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  overseers  to  make  a  rate  to  reimburse 
their  predecessors  certain  moneys  expended  for  the  relief  of  the  poor, 
such  a  proceeding  being  unnecessary,  for  if  an  overseer  advance  his  own 
money,  he  may,  whilst  in  office,  get  a  rate  for  the  relief  of  the  poor,  and 
reimburse  himself  out  of  the  moneys  arising  therefrom,  and  the  Court 

[c)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  See  tits.  "  Office"  (Enforcing  Duty),  "  Rate." 
Anon.,  2  Chit.  254  ;f  although  some  only  of  the  churchwardens  refuse,  yet  the  writ 
must  be  prayed  against  and  directed  to  all,  and  if  the  applicant  be  one  of  the 
parish  officers  he  must  pray  the  writ  against  himself  R.  v.  Edlaston  (Church- 
wardens), 1  N.  &  P.  572.f  S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  163.  S.  C.  1  Jur.  53  ;  1  N.  &  P.  20,t 
n.  (a).     See  post,  p.  221,  n.  (p). 

(/}  Ante,  p.  21.  R.  y.  Canterbury,  1  W.  Blac.  667.  S.  C.  Burr.  2290.  R.  v. 
St.  Leonard,  2  Salk.  483.     S.  C.  Cas.  t.  Holt,  508. 

(ff)  R.  V.  Holbeche,  4  T.  R.  778.  R.  v.  Edwards,  1  W.  Blac.  637.  Lidleston  v. 
Exeter  (Mayor),  Comb.  422,  428.  S.  C.  Fol.  19.  R.  v.  St.  Mary's,  8  Mod.  344.  S. 
C.  Stra.  700.  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Guardians),  Burr.  2290.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  667. 
R.  y.  Barnstable  (Inhabs.),  1  Barn.  137.  Anon.,  2  Barn.  83.  S.  C.  Stra.  26.  R. 
V.  Canton  (Oyerseers),  1  Barn.  299.  R.  y.  Spotland  (Oyerseers),  1  Barn.  137. 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.).  R.  y.  Barnwell,  II  Mod.  206.  S.  C.  Park,  74.  Dr. 
Butler  V.  Cobbett,  11  Mod.  254.  R.  v.  Radnor  (J.),  2  D.,  N.  S.  676.  See  tits.  "  Act 
of  Parliament,"  "  Rate."     Ante,  p.  9,  11. 

(h)  4  T.  R.  778  ;  1  Nolan,  121.     But  see  ante,  p.  92,  n.  (a),  135,  n.  (f). 

(i)  Ante,  p.  16,  27,  28.     R.  v.  St.  George  (Overseers),  2  W.  Blac.  694. 

(/)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D).  R.  y.  Weobly  (Churchwardens),  Stra.  1259.  R. 
y.  Canterbury,  Burr.  2290.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  667.  Anon.,  2  Barn.  426  ;  1  Bott. 
81 :  Stra.  1259;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.)  R.  v.  Barnstable  (Inhabs.),  and  cases 
there  cited;  Foley,  26  ;  1  Bott.  79;  1  Barn.  137.  R.  y.  Freshford  (Churchwardens), 
And.  24.  R.  y.  Spotland  (Overseers),  Cas.  t.  Hard.  184.  See  R.  v.  Suffolk,  5  N. 
&  M.  144,f  per  Williams,  J.  See  St.  Albans  y.  Botolph's,  11  Mod.  206.  Butler  (Dr.) 
y.  Cobbett,  11  Mod.  254,  255.  R.  v.  Radnor  (J.),  2  D.,  N.  S.  676.  Anon.,  2  Chit. 
254. 

[k)  R.  y.  Wilkinton  (Churchwardens),  1  Barn.  227  ;  andseeR.  y.  Lowton  Parish, 
11  Mod.  301.     See  tit.  "Act  of  Parliament." 

(?)  Anon..  2  Barn.  426;  there  being  a  remedy  by  appeal.     Ante,  p.  21. 

(m)  Ante,  p.  21.  R.  v.  Woebly,  T.  19  Geo.  2,  Stra.  1259;  Burr.  2292;  S.  C.  1 
W.  Blac.  667,  supra,  n.  (J).     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.). 


POOR.  271 

will    grant   a   writ    to   command   justices    to    sign,    and    allow   such    a 
rate.(7i) 

Application.     See   ante,   p.  220,  n.  (e),  and  infra,  Form  of 


Writ.      There    should   he  an   afi&davit   that    the    rate    is   necessary,   or 
urgent,  (o). 

.  Rule. — The  rule  to  make  a  poor  rate,  will,  if  there  he  an  affi- 
davit of  urgency,  he  made  ahsolute  in  the  first  instance. Q>) 

.]     Form  of  ^Yrit. — The  writ  to  command  parish  officers  to  make 

a  rate,  must  be  prayed  against  and  directed  to   all  the  parish  officers, 
although  applied  for  by  some  of  them.(5') 

.]  Siyning,  Alhioing,  &c. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  jus- 
tices to  sign  a  poor  rate,  where  it  appears  to  have  been  properly  made, 
and  signed  by  the  overseers,  notwithstanding  no  churchwardens  have  been 
sworn  in  for  a  period  of  six  years,  and  one  of  those  last  sworn  in  had 
died  before  making  of  the  rate,(r)  and  although  a  former  rate,  made  by 
part  only  of  the  parish,  have  been  before  signed ;  for  it  is  not  inconsist- 
ent to  sign  both,  as  thereby  the  right  of  those  omitted  may  be  con- 
tested ;(s)  therefore  a  return  to  such  *a  writ,  stating  that  the  rate  r*222"l 
is  unequal,  is  no  answer  thereto ;(«)  but  a  return  of  the  illegality 
of  the  rate  will  be  good.(!() 

The  writ  also  lies  to  command  justices  to  aUoio  a  poor  rate  regularly 
made.(y)  Thus,  where  a  parish  contained  within  itself  a  borough,  not 
co-extensive  with  it,  and  the  mayor  thereof,  in  his  return  to  a  mandamus 
for  allowing  a  poor  rate  made  for  the  whole  parish,  alleged  a  custom  which 
had  existed  since  stat.  43  Eliz.  c.  2,  to  appoint  separate  churchwardens, 
&c.,  and  to  make  separate  rates  for  the  borough,  and  for  those  parts  of  the 
parish  which  lay  without  the  borough ;  it  was  held  that  such  custom  was 

(w)  Ante,  p.  15,  18—27.  R.  v.  Littlepoint,  6  Mod.  97.  S.  C.  Foley,  8.  S.  C.  2 
Salk.  531.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  232.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1009.  S.  C.  10  Mod.  104.  S.  C. 
Holt,  579.  R.  V.  Rotherhithe,  8  Mod.  339.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.)  See  tits. 
"Drainage"  (Rate),  "Overseer"  (Reimbursement),  "Rate." 

(o)  Ante,  p.  15  ;  1  Barn.  137.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application"  (Affidavits). 

\p)  R.  V.  St.  Andrews,  7  A.  &  E.  281,f  and  note  {a).  See  R.  v.  Edlaston 
(Churchwardens),  1  N.  &  P.  20.f     See  tit.  "  Corpse,"  post,  tit.  "Rule." 

(y)  Ante,  p.  220,  n.  (e).  R.  v.  Edlaston  (Churchwardens),  1  N.  &  P.  20,f  n. 
(a),  21,  n.  {b)  ;  W.  W.  &  D.  163.  S.  C.  1  Jur.  53,  where  see  form  of  writ,  citing 
Anon.,  2  Chit.  254.  See  R.  v.  Gadsby,  1  N.  &  P.  572;f  and  R.  v.  Leicester  there 
cited.     See  post,  tits.  "Application,"  "Writ"  (Form). 

(r)  Ante,  p.  12,  and  220,  n.  (/i),and  infra,  p.  222,  n.  [v).  R.  v.  Godolphin  (Lord), 
1  D.  &  L.  830.  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  57,  M.  C.  Breedon  v.  Gill,  5  Mod.  275  ;  6 
Mod.  229.  Norwich's  case.  Comb.  478,  479.  S.  C.  Carth.  450.  Peterborough's 
case,  1  Sid.  377.  Nottingham's  case,  Comb.  483.  R.  v.  Worcester  (Mayor),  Cas.  t. 
Hard.  123,  n.  (1)  Subdeany  v.  Chichester  (Mayor),  3  Keb.  572.  S.  C.  3  Keb.  594. 
R.  V.  Dorchester  (J.),  Stra.  393.  Curser  v.  Smith,  1  Barn.  59.  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."  (A.)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) 

(s)  R.  V.  Beecher,  8  Mod.  335;  vide  Carth.  450 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  See 
tits.  "Churchwarden"  (Swearing  in,)  "Manor"  (Admittance,  p.  156,  n.  [q).) 

U)  Ante,  p.  220,  n.  [I).     Comb.  478,  supra.     Bishopsgate  v.  Beecher,  8  Mod.  10. 

(m)  Ante,  p.  220,  n.  {h).     8  Mod.  10.    Supra,  Gude  Cr.  Pr.  188,  189. 

(t.)  Ante,  p.  12.     R.  v.  Fisher,  Say.  160.     R.  v.  Gordon,  1  B.  &  A.  524. 


272  TAPriNG's   MANDAMUS. 

invalid;  the  return  was  quashed,  and  a  peremptory  mandamus  award- 
ed.(»') 

The  signature  and  allowance  of  a  poor  rate  by  justices,  or  those  whose 
duty  it  is  so  to  do,  is,  since  stat.  6  &  7  Wm.  4,  c.  90,  a  merely  ministerial 
and  not  a  judicial  act,  and  may  be  considered  a  mere  matter  of  form.(x-) 

.  Rule. — The  rule  for  signing  and  allowing  a  poor  rate,  is  abso- 
lute in  the  first  instance ;  because  while  the  rule  is  depending,  the  poor 
may  suffer;  no  overseer  of  the  poor  being  obliged  to  disburse  money,  until 
he  shall  have  obtained  a  rate  for  collecting  it.(^) 

.]     Rate;  Apj)cal  against. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  Court 

of  Quarter  Sessions,  or  those  having  jurisdiction  under  a  local  act,  to  ( ntcr 
continuances  and  hear  an  appeal  against  a  poor  rate.(z)  But  the  appli- 
cants must  shew  themselves  strictly  entitled  to  such  mandamus.(a)  The 
appeal  may  be  against  four  poor  rates,  and  also  against  an  order  made  at 
the  general  Quarter  Sessions  confirming  such  rates. (i) 

The  writ  also  lies  to  command  justices  to  enter  continuances  and  hear 
an  appeal  against  a  certificate  of  the  guardians  of  the  poor,  certifying  that 
a  certain  sum  was  needful  to  be  raised  for  the  maintenance  and  employment 
of  the  poor,  and  also  an  appeal  against  a  warrant  of  a  justice,  directed  to 
„  certain  assessors  and  collectors,  requiring  them  to  assess  a  cer- 
tain  sum  upon  certain  parishioners;  and  to  hear  and  determine 
the  merits  of  the  said  appeals,  (e) 

.]     .      Collecting. — It  seems  that  the  Court   has  refused  a 

writ  to  command  the  collection  of  a  rate.((/) 

.]  Rate  Books,  &c. ;  Inspection. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  com- 
mand in.spection  and  copy  of  poor  rate  books,  kept  in  pursuance  of  a  local 
act,  the  Court  of  B.  E.,  not  being  authorized  by  such  act,  or  by  stat.  17 
Geo.  2,  c.  8,  or  at  common  law  to  grant  such  inspection,  &c.(e)     But  as  a 

{w)  R.  V.  Gordon,  1  B.  &  A.  524-1  See  R.  v.  Hollister  or  Folly,  1  Bott.  78.  See 
tits.  "Custom,"  "  Manor"  (Custom). 

[x)  R.  V.  Lord  Yarborough,  12  A.  &  E.  416.t  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  491.  R.  v.  Ut- 
toxeter,  1  Bott.  83,  305.  R.  v.  Hamstall  (Inhabs.),  3  T.  R.  382.  R.  v.  Dorchester 
(J.),  Stra.  393.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  82.  See  3  Keb.  572,  594.  See  tits.  "  Churchwar- 
den" (Swearing  in),  "  Office"  (Officer  Ministerial). 

[y)  R.  V.  Godolphin  (Lord),  1  D.  &  L.  831.  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  57,  M.  C.  R.  v. 
Fisher,  Say.  160.     See  tits.  "  Corpse,"  "Overseer,"  and  post,  tit.  "  Rule." 

(z)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Hendon  (Inhabs.),  2  D.  &  R.  249.f  R.  v.  Essex,  1  D. 
539.  R.  T.  St.  Peter's  (J.),  1  N.  &  M.  108.t  R.  v.  Essex  (J.),  5  M.  &  S.  513.  R. 
V.  Sussex  (J.),  15  East,  205.  R.  v.  White,  4  T.  R.  771.  R.  v.  London  (J.),  15 
East,  631.  R.  v.  Worcestersh.  (J.),  5  M.  &  S.  458.  R.  v.  Wilts.  (J.),  8  B.  &  C. 
SSO.f  S.  C.  2  M.  &  R.  401.  R.  v.  Sufifolk  (J.),  6  M.  &  S.  57.  R.  v.  Herts.  (J.), 
1  N.  &  M.  331.t  R.  V.  Suffolk  (.!.),  8  D.  618.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (J.),  4  N.  k  M.  238. 
S.  C.  2  A.  &  E.  370.f  R.  v.  Kent  (J.),  9  B.  &  C.  283.f  R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.),  3  D. 
&  L.  109.     See  tit.  "Court  Inferior"  (Appeal.) 

(a)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  4  M.  &  S.  327.  See  post,  tit.  "Ap- 
plication." 

(b)  R.  V.  Suffolk  (J.),  1  B.  &  A.  640.1     See  tit.  post,  "  Writ"  (Form  of). 

(c)  R.  V.  Norwich  (J.),  3  D.  &  R.  43. f     See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices.) 
\d)  R.  V.  Norwich  (Overseers),  Nol.  28. 

(e)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  St.  Marylebone  Vestry,  5  A.  &  E.  269.f  R.  v.  Sta- 
fordsh.  (J.),  6  A.  &  E.  89,  90,  94.f     See  tits.   "Accounts,"  "Books,"  "Borough," 


POOR. 


273 


rated  parishioner  has  a  right  to  inspect,  at  a  reasonable  time,  the  accounts 
of  the  expenditure  of  the  parish  moneys,  kept  by  guardians  of  the  poor, 
appointed  under  stat.  22  (Jco.  2,  c.  83,  so  the  Court  of  B.  E.  will,  by 
mandamus,  command  such  an  inspection. (/) 

.]  Rate  Boohs;  BcUvcnj. — The  writ  lies  to  command  an  ex- 
overseer  of  the  poor  to  deliver  over  the  books  of  the  poor  rates,  &c.  to  the 
overseers  elect,  who,  with  the  churchwardens  for  the  time,  arc  legally  en- 
titled to  them,  for  they  arc  public  books,  and  ought  to  be  delivered  over 
by  one  overseer  to  another,  in  order  that  all  the  parishioners  may  have 
access  to  them.(//)  If,  therefore,  there  be  a  contest  as  to  the  election  of 
overseers,  that  must  properly  appear  by  the  return  ;(/i)  but  the  right  of  a 
parishioner  in  such  a  case,  is  a  mere  private  right,  for  which  the  Court  of 
B.  R.  will  not  grant  the  writ.(/) 

.]  .  Defaulters. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  Com- 
missioners of  "Woods  and  Forests  to  pay  a  poor  rate  in  respect  of  lands 
held  by  them  under  the  Crown,  because  either  the  lands  are  in  possession 
of  private  individuals  or  of  the  Crown ;  if,  on  the  one  hand,  they  be  in 
possession  of  private  individuals,  then  a  distress  warrant  may  be  obtained 
against  them  ;  but  if,  on  the  other  hand,  they  be  in  the  possession  of  the 
Crown,  they  are  not  rateable. (y)  Nor  does  the  writ  lie  to  command  an 
incorporated  company  to  pay  poor  rates,  although  it  have  not  distrainable 
goods,  the  affidavits  shewing  that  all  its  goods  have  been  fraudulently 
leased,  and  that  the  parish  may  be  driven  to  try  an  action  on  the  ground 
of  fraud,  if  compelled  to  resort  to  such  action. (A-) 

*The  writ  lies  to  command  justices  to  summon  defoultcrs  for  ^^c)ir,x-\ 
nonpayment  of  poor  rates ;(?)  or  to  command  such  justices  to  ^ 
hear  such  complaints  as  shall  be  duly  laid  before  them,  against  such  as 
have  neglected  to  pay  the  poor  rate,  and  to  proceed  to  levy  the  same  by 
distress,  &c.(m)  But  the  Court  has  refused  to  command  them  to  issue  a 
distress  warrant  to  enforce  the  payment  of  poor  rates,  where  it  was  doubt- 
ful whether  they  or  the  warrants  were  legal,  and  the  rates  were  recovera- 
ble by  other  proceedings ;(»)  if,  however,  it  be  perfectly  clear  that  the 

"Company,"  "Corporation  Municipal"  (Inspection),  "County,"  "Drainage"  (Books, 
&c.),  "  Manor"  (Rolls). 

(/)  R.  V.  Great  Farringdon  (ChurcliM'ardens),  9  B.  &  C.  541.t  R.  v.  Watts,  7  A. 
&  E.  464.     See  tit.  "Act  of  Parliament." 

{g)  Ante,  p.  209,  n.  [iv).  R.  v.  Clapham,  1  Wils.  305.  R.  v.  Clear,  4  B.  &  C. 
900  ;t  1  Bott.  300,  c.  328.  Anon.  2  Barn.  326.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  xMan."  (A.)  See 
tit.  "  Overseers." 

(A)  2  Barn.  326,  supra.  (?)  4  B.  &  C.  901.f     See  tit.  "Parish." 

{j)  Ante,  p.  21.  Ex  parte  Reeve,  5  D.  GG8.  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Woods,  &c.  (Com- 
missioners), W.  W.  &  D.  364.  See  tits.  "Crown,"  "Customs,"  "  ]\Ianor"  (Royal 
Manor),  "  Treasury  Lords." 

{k)  Ante,  p.  18—27.  R.  v.  Margate  Harbour,  2  Chit.  256.  S.  C.  3  B.  &  A.  220.1 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)     See  tits.  "  Company"  (Execution),  "  Execution." 

{I)  Ante,  p.  12.  Anon.,  2  Chit.  257.f  See  tits.  "Courts  Inferior,"  "Quarter 
Sessions"  (Justices),  "Rate." 

{m)  R.  V.  Sussex  (J.),  3  N.  &  M.  266,f  per  Lord  Denman,  C.  J.,  citing  R.  \.  Benn, 
6  T.  R.  198,  where  see  form  of  rule.  R.  v.  Paynter,  7  Q.  B.  255.f  S.  C.  14  L,  J., 
N,  S.  179,  M.  C.     See  tit.  "Distress." 

(n)  Ante,  p.  18—27.     R.  v.  Hall,  4  N.  &  M.  546."     R.  r.  Bucks  (J.),  2  D.  &  R, 

May,  1852.— 18 


274  TAPrlNO's    MANDAMUS. 

rate  is  tlue  and  legal,  the  Court  cannot  refuse  to  interfcre,(o)  and  will, 
therefore,  grunt  the  writ;  for  as  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  to 
make  a  rate,  so  they  will  grant  it  for  the  levying  thereof,(2>)  and  notwith- 
standing there  may  have  been  no  appeal. (5^) 

The  defaulters  must  have  been  previously  summoned  by  the  magis- 
trates.(;•)  So  that  the  writ  will  be  granted  only  where  the  applicant 
has  acted  legally,  and  fulfilled  and  respected  all  legal  formu]iC.(N)  And 
it  must  clearly  appear  to  the  Court  that  the  warrant  will,  if  granted, 
be  legal,  and  that  the  applicant  has  no  other  remedy  whereby  to  enforce 
the  rate;(0  but  although  the  rate  may  have  been  made  for  a  year,  when 
it  should  only  have  been  for  a  quarter,  and  afterwards  inadvertently  con- 
firmed, the  Court,  on  a  mandamus  to  grant  a  warrant  in  such  a  case,  will 
limit  it  to  such  quarter.(M) 

r*oop,i      * •]     Application.— The  application  for  such  a  writ,  must, 

'-  """      however,  be  made  promptly  after  the  right  to  it  has  accrued. (?;) 

.]     Rule. — It  is  no  objection  to  a  rule  for  a  mandamus  to  justices 

to  issue  their  warrant  of  distress  for  the  levy  of  poor  rates,  that  it  includes 
two  separate  and  distinct  rates,  because  the  writ  in  such  a  case  is  divisible ; 
and  if  there  be  any  diifcrences  in  the  circumstances  attending  the  rates, 
they  may  and  will  be  separately  considered,  so  that  the  rule  may  be  made 
absolute  as  to  the  one,  and  not  to  the  other ;  and  even  the  costs  may  be 
apportioned :  so  that  four  rates  may  be  included  in  one  appeal,  so  several 
rates  may  be  comprised  in  one  mandamus. (if) 

689.t  S.  C.  1  B.  &  C.  485.t  Undcrhill  v.  Ellicombe,  M'Cl.  &  You.  394.  R.  v. 
Bucks  (J.),  3  N.  &  M.  68-1  R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.),  5  N.  &  M.  129,t  per  Williams,  J. 
R.  V.  Middlesex,  2  Ld.  Ken.  163.  R.  v.  Cheek,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  05,  M.  C;  1  Wils. 
133  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  But  see  stat.  6  &  1  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  App.,  which, 
as  it  provides  a  full  indemnitj'  for  all  acts  properly  done  in  execution  of  a  writ  of 
mandamus,  so  now  the  Court  is  much  more  liberal  in  its  interference  in  doubtful 
cases.     As  to  Ireland,  see  a  similar  enactment,  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  8. 

(o)  Ante,  p.  31,  n.  (k).  R.  v.  Sussex  (J.),  3  N.  &  M.  263-1  St.  Luke's  v.  Mid- 
dlesex (J.),  1  Wils.  133.  The  stat.  6  &  Y  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  App.,  provides  a  full  in- 
demnity for  any  act  legally  done  in  execution  of  a  mandamus,  so  that  the  Court 
will,  in  a  case  of  doubtful'jurisdictiun,  with  more  readiness  grant  the  writ.  As  to 
Ireland,  see  a  similar  enactment  in  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  8. 

(p)  R.  V.  Wilson,  5  N.&  M.  119.t  R-  v.  Ellis,  2  D.,  N.  S.  361.  R.  v.  Middlesex 
(J.),  2  D.,  N.  S.  385.  R.  v.  Worcestersh.  (J.),  4  P.  &  D.  440.  S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
13,  M.  C.  R.  V.  Buckinghamsh.,  3  N.  &  M.  GS.f  St.  Luke's  case,  1  Wils.  133.  R. 
V.  Newcomb,  4  T.  R.  368.  R.  v.  Mirehouse,  2  A.  &  E.  037.t  Hutchius  v.  Cham- 
bers, Burr.  579,  587;  and  see  2  A.  &  E.  618,t  n.  (a),  and  8  Mod.  10;  Stra.  992; 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  R.  v.  Benn,  G  T.  R.  198  ;  7  T.  R.  270.  R.  v.  Hughes, 
3  A.  &  E.  425.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  94.f  See  tits.  "  Court  Inferior"  (Judgment,  Exe- 
cution), "Execution,"  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Justices). 

[q)  R.  V.  Morgan,  &c.,  2  A.  &  E.  618,f  n.  (a).     See  ante,  p.  21. 

(r)  R.  v.  Benn,  G  T.  R.  193.  But  see  Const's  Bott.  207,  pi.  208.  R.  v.  Hughes, 
3  A.  &  E.  427.t  See  also  1  Wils.  133,  supra.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  See 
supra,  n.  [l),  and  tit.  "  Rate." 

(.s)  Ante,  p.  27,  28  ;  3  A.  &  E.  428,1  supra. 

{t)  Ante,  p.  18—27.  R.  v.  Hall,  1  liar.  &  W.  83.  See  tits.  "Quarter  Sessions" 
(Juslices),  "  Rate." 

(w)  Bishopsgate  v.  Beecher,  8  Mod.  10.     And  see  ante,  p.  280,  n.  (ff),  (h). 

(v)  R.  v.  Ellis,  2  D.,  N.  S.  361.    See  tit.  "Application"  post,  (When  to  be  made). 

{w)  R.  y.  Ellis,  2  D.,  N.  S.  361.     S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  96,  Q.  B.  ;  U.  C.  20.     R.  v. 


PREBENDARY.  275 

.]  Reimbursement — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  Quarter  Ses- 
sions to  hear  an  application  under  stat.  41  Geo.  3,  c.  23,  s.  8,  and  to 
order  the  repayment  of  a  sum  of  money  overcharged  in  a  poor  rate,  if 
there  exists  no  other  remedy. (x) 

.]  Pool'  Laio  Commissioners. — The  writ  lies  to  command  guar- 
dians of  the  poor  of  a  parish  to  obey  a  certain  order  under  the  hands  and 
seals  of  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners  ;  hut  not  where  such  parish  is  ex- 
empted by  its  local  act.(^)  So  it  lies  to  command  such  guardians  to  pay 
money  collected  for  the  relief  of  the  poor,  under  an  order  of  the  Poor  Law 
Commissioners,  to  a  board  of  guardians  of  an  union,  described  in  that 
order  as  duly  appointed. (.t)  And  to  such  a  writ,  a  return  generally  that 
the  defendants  are  not  guardians,  is  bad.(;i5;) 

Poor  Law  Commissioners.]  See  titles  Guardians  of  the  Poor  ; 
Poor  (^Poor  Law  Commissioners). 

Poor  Rate.]     See  titles  PonWi  (i?a/e) ;  Poor  {Rate);  Rate. 

Portreeve.]  Election  ;  Swearing  in,  &c. — The  writ  lies  to  command 
the  holding  of  a  Court,  the  impanelling  and  swearing  of  a  jury,  and  the 
charging  of  them  to  elect  and  swear  some  person  to  the  office  of  a  port- 
reeve, (a)  So  the  writ  also  lies  to  command  the  lord  of  a  Court  Leet  to 
administer  the  usual  oath  to  a  portreeve,  duly  elected. (&) 

* .]     Insignia. — As  to  the  delivery  up  of  insignia  by  port-  r*2261 

reeve. (f) 

Prebendary.]  Election. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  election  of 
a  prebendary,  (f/) 

The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  election  of  a  prebendary  to  be  a 

Suffolk  (J.),  1  B.  &  Aid.  G40.     See  supra,  tit.  "Rate"  (Appeal),  p.  222,  n.  {b),  and 
post,  tits.  "  Rule,"  "  Writ"  (Mandatory  Clause). 

ix)  R.  T.  St.  Peter's  (J.),  1  N.  &  M.  108.f  S.  C.  4  B.  &  Ad.  342.t  See  tits. 
"  Constable,  High"  (Reimbursement  by),  '•  Drainage"  (Reimbursement),   "  Over- 

SGGrs"   fRfitG). 

(v)  R.  V.  Poor  Commissioners,  1  N.  &  P.  STl.f  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  l.f  R.  v.  St. 
Andrew's  Parish,  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  341,  Q.  B.     See  tit.  "  Guardians  of  the  Poor." 

\z)  R.  V.  St.  Andrew's,  Ilolborn,  10  A.  &  E.  TSS.f     See  tit.  "Money." 

(^zz)  Note  (z),  supra.     See  tit.  "Return." 

[a]  R.  V.  Williams,  Say.  140.  As  to  the  derivation  of  the  word  "  Portreeve,"  and 
the  nature  of  the  office,  see  Blount's  Law  Diet.,  and  Tomlin's  Law  Diet.,  tit.  "Port- 
greve."  As  to  returns,  see  tit.  "  Office."  Stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  App.  See  tit.  "  Ale- 
taster,"  "Court Inferior,"  "Mayor,"  "Manor"  (Leet),  "Office"  (Election,  &c.) 

(i)  Phillipp's  case,  2  Roll.  82,  85;  also  cited  in  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  xAIan."  (A).  See 
tits.  College"  (Oaths),  "Manor"  (Leet),  "Resiant,"  "  Oath  of  Allegiance." 

(c)  R.  V.  Jennings,  2  Jur.  179  ;  and  tits.  "  Company,"  "  Corporation"  (Munici- 
pal), "Insignia,"  "Seal." 

{d)  Stra.'l082.  S.  C.  Andr.  20.  Chester  (Ep.)  v.  Harward,  1  T.  R.  652  ;  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.);  Andr.  21.  R.  v.  Rochester  (Dean),  1  Barn.  40.  S.  P.  R. 
V.  Norwich  (Dean),  Stra.  159.  R.  v.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  536.  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"Man."  C.  1,  2.     See  tits.  "  Canon,"  "Office"  (Election). 


27G  tapping's   mandamus. 

canon  rcsiJcntiary,  in  order  to  his  qualification  for  dean,  if  quarc  impcdit 
do  not  lie. (c) 

.]     Institution,  (fr. — The  writ  also  lies  to  institute  and  induct  into 

and  invest  of  a  prebend. (/)  But  the  writ  does  not  lie  if  the  applicant 
claim  under  a  custom  which  is  ridiculous  and  void,  as  a  custom  to  be  ap- 
pointed a  supernumerary  prebendary.  (7)  Nor  will  it  lie  for  that  which 
is  the  subject  of  quare  impedit. (7t) 

.]     Installation. — The  writ  lies  to   command  installation  into  a 

prebend,  it  being  but  a  ministerial  act.(<')  Thus,  it  has  been  granted  to 
command  the  installation  of  the  provost  of  a  college  into  a  prebend  annex- 
ed to  such  provostship  by  charter,  confirmed  by  act  of  Parliament. 

.]     Sicear  in. — The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  swearing  in  of  a 

prebendary,(y)  and  this  although  he  do  not  require  installation.  Thu.s, 
the  Archdeacon  of  Eochester,  when  instituted  and  inducted  into  that  office, 
is  ipso  facto  inducted  into  the  prebend  annexed  to  it  by  royal  grant,  and 
may  therefore  claim  to  be  sworn  as  a  prebendary  without  being  installed. 

.]     Admission. — The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  admission  of 

a  prebendary,  but  to  such  a  writ  a  return  of  non  fuit  elcctus  is  good.(^-) 

The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  admission  of  a  prebendary  to  his  stall 
and  voice.  A  prebend  is  a  freehold  office,  and  installation,  which  is  the 
act  to  be  done  to  complete  the  admission,  is  a  merely  ministerial  duty.(/) 
In  *some  of  the  cases  in  which  the  Court  has  thus  granted  the 
>-  ^'J  writ  there  was  no  return  of  "Visitor,"  in  others,  the  prebend  was 
created  by  act  of  Parliament,  and  so  made  a  sort  of  lay  fee.(m) 

(e)  Ante,  p.  26.  R.  v.  St.  Peters  12  A.  &  E.  512.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  253.  See 
tit.  "  Canon"  (Residentiary). 

(/)  Clark  V.  Sarum  (Ep.),  Stra.  1082.  S.  C.  Andr.  20;  185.  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"  Man."  (A.),  cited  in  R.  t.  Dublin  (Dean),  8  Mod.  28.  R.  v.  Dr.  Bland,  T  Mod. 
355.     See  tits.  "  Canon,"  "  Parson." 

(g)  Ante,  p.  113,  n.  {g).  Dr.  Owen's  Case,  Skin.  45.  S.  C.  Jones,  199.  S.  C.  2 
Show.  200,  n.  (a),  3rd  edit.,  nom.  R.  v.  Stenhouse.  See  tits.  "  Canon,"  "  Curate," 
"Custom,"  "Manor"  (Custom,  License). 

(h)  Ante,  p.  26.  Clarke  v.  Sarum  (Ep.),  Stra.  1081,  n.  (1),  3rd  edit.  Powell  v. 
Millbank,  1  T.  R.  399.  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396.  R.  v.  St.  Peter's,  12  A. 
&E.  512.t     S.  C.  4P.  &D.  253. 

(i)  R.  V.  Rochester  (Dean),  1  Barn.  40.  Dr.  Sherlock's  case,  cited  in  R.  v.  Dr. 
Ward,  1  Barn.  112,  and  in  1  Wils.  208,  and  in  R.  r.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  24. 
R.  V.  Salisbury  (Ep.),  Andr.  20.  See  tits.  "  Bishop,"  "  Canon,"  "  Cathedral  Stall," 
Curate,"  "Dean,"  "Parson,"  and  infra,  "Admission." 

(J)  R.  V.  Rochester  (Dean),  3  B.  &  Ad.  95.f  R.  v.Baylay,  1  B.  &  Ad.  TGl.f  See 
tit.  "OfQce"  (Swearing  in). 

[k)  R.  V.  Lambert,  1  Sid.  209,  210.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  3 ;  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  200.  See 
tit.  "  Office"  (Admission,  Return  non  fuit  electus). 

(I)  Dr.  Owen's  case,  Skin.  45.  S.  C.  Jones,  199.  There  are  express  precedents 
in  Register,  303,  also  stated  in  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  171,  per  Keeling,  C.  J.  R.  v. 
Stenhowe,  2  Show.  200,  n.  (a),  3rd  edit.  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  20C.  R.  v. 
Norwich  (Dean),  Stra.  158.  S.  C.  Fort.  222,  cited  in  2  Bac.  Abr.  532  ;  Andr.  21. 
R.  V.  Rochester  (Dean),  1  Barn.  40.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  4.  R.  v.  Dublin 
(Dean),  &c.),  Stra.  536 ;  Stra.  1082.  R.  v.  Salisbury  (Ep.),  cited  in  R.  v.  London 
(Ep.),  1  Wils.  13.  R.  V.  St.  Peter's,  12  A.  &  E.  512.f  See  tit.  '•  Cathedral  Stall," 
"  Churchwarden." 

(77!)  Ante,  p.  11.  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  208;  Stra.  159.  See  tits,  "Act 
of  Parliament,"  "College"  (Visitor),  "Visitor." 


PRISONER.  277 

.[     Restoration. — The  writ  docs  not  lie  to  command  a  visitor  to 

restore  a  prebendary  wlioni  lie  lias  deprived,  for  a  visitor  has  an  absolute 
power  within  his  jurisdiction. (n) 

Precedence.]  Loss  of  precedence  or  authority,  as  that  of  alderman  of 
a  city,  is  a  sufficient  ground  for  a  writ  of  mandamus. (o) 

Presentment.]  The  writ  will  not  be  granted  to  command  the  pre- 
sentment of  a  fact  upon  oath,  unless  the  existence  of  such  fact  be  quite 
evident,  (p) 

But  the  writ  lies  to  command  justices  to  redress  a  grievance  shown 
upon  a  presentment  by  a  magistrate  whose  duty  it  is  to  present  it  to 
them.((/) 

Prior.]  The  writ  of  mandamus  has  never  been  granted  for  a  prior, 
because  he  was  an  ecclesiastical  corporation,  and  had  a  proper  visitor, 
which  duty  afterwards  devolved  upon  the  archbishop,  (r) 

President  or  College.]  See  titles  College  (^President);  Office ^ 
Visitor. 

Principal  Burgess.]     See  titles  Burgess  (Principal);   Office. 

Prisoner.]  Prison. — The  writ  will  be  granted  to  command  the  gov- 
ernor or  gaoler  of  a  prison  or  house  of  correction  to  receive  a  prisoner  for 
debt,  duly  committed  to  his  prison  ;(8)  but  the  Court  will  not  grant  the 
writ  to  command  justices  to  order  prisoners  committed  to  gaol  for  j.^^nQ-\ 
*trial,  any  other  food  than  bread  and  water,  where  such  prisoners  L  -'"  J 
are  able  to  work,  and  have  the  means  of  employment  offered  to  them,  by 
which  they  may  earn  their  support,  if  they  choose  to  work.(^)  The  writ 
has,  however,  been  granted,  under  stat.  5  &  6  Vict.  c.  22,  (for  regulating 

(n)  Ante,  p.  10.  R.  r.  Chester  (Ep.),  2  H.  21  Geo.  2,  1  Wils.  206.  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "  Man."  (B.)  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  21.  Phillips  v.  Bury,  Ld.  Raym.  5.  S.  C.  2  T. 
R.  346.     S.  C.  Skin.  447,  475.     S.  C.  Show.  P.  C.  35.     Sec  tit.  "  Visitor." 

(o)  R.  Y.  Oxford  (Mayor),  Latch,  231,  per  Dodcridge,  J.,  and  Hyde,  C.  J.  See 
tits.  "Alderman"  (Restoration),  "Corporation  Municipal,"  "Mayor,"  "Office" 
(Restoration). 

[p)  R.  V.  Montacutc,  1  W.  Blac.  60.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283.  See  tits.  "Custom," 
"Freeman"  (Presentment),  "  Gaol,"  "  Highway"  (Presentment),  "Inquest,"  "Jury," 
"Manor"  (Lect),  (Baron),  "Nuisance." 

[q)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  North  Riding  (J.),  2  B.  &  C.  286.f  S.  0.  3  D.  &  R.  510  jf 
and  see  2  B.  &  C.  341.t     See  tit.  "  Gaol." 

(r)  Sec  Mr.  Leigh's  case,  3  Mod.  334.  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Lee,  &c.,  1  Show.  252, 
per  Holt,  C.  J.  Dr.  Withcrington  v.  Christ's  Coll.,  1  Sid.  71.  See  tits.  "Abbot," 
"Knight  Templar,"  "Monk,"  "Office,"  "Visitor." 

(s)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  II.  of  Correction  (Govr.),  2  N.  &  M.  138.f  See  tit.  "  Gaol," 
"Nuisance"  (Removal). 

(<)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  North  Riding  (.1.),  3  D,  &  R.  510. f  S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  286.t 
See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "Gaol." 


278  tapping's    mandamus. 

the  Queen's  Prison),  to  command  the  keeper  of  such  prison  to  make  allow- 
ances to  a  prisoner  out  of  certain  funds  in  the  act  specified. (i/) 

.]     Depositions. — The  writ  lies,  under  stat.  G  &  7  Wm.  4,  c.  114, 

s.  3,  to  command  the  delivery  to  a  prisoner  or  his  attorney  of  copies  of 
the  examinations  of  witnesses,  upon  whose  depositions  he  had  been  from 
time  to  time  and  finally  stands  committed. (r)  As,  however,  a  prisoner, 
when  committed  to  prison  for  further  examination  merely,  and  not  finally 
for  trial,  has  no  right  to  copies  of  the  depositions  under  such  statute,  so 
a  mandamus  for  that  purpose  will  be  denied. (zt;) 

The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  a  magistrate  to  produce  depositions 
taken  before  him  on  a  charge  of  felony,  for  the  purpose  of  founding  an 
indictment;  the  proceeding  to  be  taken  in  such  case  being,  to  suhpocna 
the  magistrate  to  produce  the  depositions. (x) 

Private  Institutions.] — See  titles  Charity;  Institutions  Private. 

Privy  Council,  The  Judicial  Committee  of.]  Rehearing. — The 
writ  does  not  command  the  judicial  committee  of  the  privy  council  to 
rehear  the  matter  of  an  appeal  to  them  from  the  Arches  Court  of  Canter- 
bury, or  from  any  other  Court,  and  upon  which  they  have  decided,  nor 
can  they  be  required  to  receive  a  petition  to  her  Majesty  in  council  to 
rehear,  there  being  no  distinction  in  substance  between  a  mandamus  to 
receive  a  petition  to  rehear,  and  a  mandamus  to  rehear. (y)  Nor  will  the 
writ  be  granted  for  such  purpose,  although  there  be  a  suggestion  of  error 
in  the  decision;  for  when  a  Court  of  competent  jurisdiction  has  decided 
a  case,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  no  jurisdiction. (z) 

Proctor.]  As  a  proctor  is  not  a  temporal  ofiicer,  but  a  spiritual  one, 
rsicnoQT  *and  so  under  the  sole  control  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Courts,  which 
'-  have  an  original  jurisdiction  and  cognizance  over  their  own  officers 

exclusive  of  the  Courts  of  Law  ;  therefore,  the  Court  of  B.  E,.,  where  the 
writ  of  mandamus  must  be  prayed,  cannot  take  notice  of  his  office,  viz., 

(m)  Ante,  p.  11.  In  re  Long,  14  L.  J.,  X.  S.  23,  Q.  B.  The  rule  for  the  peremp- 
tory mandamus  was  made  absolute  in  the  first  instance ;  but  the  writ  was  after- 
wards quashed  on  the  merits  of  the  case.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  146,  Q.  B.  See  tit.  "Act 
of  Parliament." 

{v)  R.  T.  London  (Mayor),  1  D.  &  M.  484.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  555.f  S.  C.  13  L.  J., 
N.  S.  67,  M.  C.  S.  C.  1  D.  &  L.  896,  nom.  Ex  parte  Fletcher.  See  tits.  "  Courts 
Inferior"  (Records),  "Prisoner." 

{w)  Ante,  p.  27,  28,  supra,  n.  [h).    See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Depositions." 

(z)  Ante,  p.  20.  In  re  Bedford  (J.),  1  Chit.  627,  Abbott,  C.  J.,  saying  there  was 
no  precedent  for  such  an  application.  R.  v.  Smith,  Stra.  126.  Welsh  v.  Richards, 
Barnes,  468.     See  tit.  "  Depositions." 

(y)  Ex  parte  Smyth,  4  N.  &  M.  582.t  S.  C.  3  A.  k  E.  7l9.t  S.  C.  1  H.  &  TT. 
417.  Ex  parte  Morgan,  2  Chit.  250.  Ex  parte  Poe,  2  N.  &  M.  636  ;f  5  N.  &  M. 
145  ;f  1  H.  &  W.  282.  See  tits.  "  Courts  Inferior"  (Rehearing),  "  Courts  Inferior" 
(Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council),  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Rehearing,  Review). 

(2)  Ante,  p.  110,  n.  (e)  ;  4  N.  &  M.  582.f  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  7l9.t  See  tit.  "  Quar- 
ter Sessions"  (Hearing). 


UARTER     SESSIONS. 


279 


what  are  bis  dutieSj  or  wliat  estate  he  has  in  his  oflScc,  whether  for  life  or 
otherwise. («) 

A  mandamus,  therefore,  does  not  lie  in  either  to  admit  or  to  restore  to 
the  office  of  a  proctor  in  Doctors'  Commons,(Z>)  because,  it  is  not  only  not 
such  a  public  office  for  whicli  a  mandamus  will  lie,  but  also  it  is  an 
Ecclesiastical  employment,  and  a  matter  properly  and  solely  cognizable  in 
an  Ecclesiastical  Court, (r)  and  therefore,  one  of  which  the  common  law 
cannot  take  notice. ((/)  The  Court  Ecclesiastical  has  no  other  way  of 
punishing  a  proctor  than  by  displacing  him,  and  if  this  should  be  remedied 
by  a  mandamus,  then  such  an  officer  might  offijnd  without  punishment. (e) 

Provost  OP  College.]  See  titles  College  (Provost) ;  Seal;  Prehen- 
darj  (Installation)  ;  Eton  College;  Provost  of  Eton. 

ProA'OST  of  Eton.]     See  titles  College  (Provost);  Eton  (Provost  of). 

Quarter  Sessions,  Court  of.]  As  to  the  general  jurisdiction  of 
the  Court  of  B.  R.  over  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions,  see  titles  Courts 
(Inferior) ;  Manor  (Leet). 

This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 1st.  Quarter  Sessions ;  2nd.  Petty 
Sessions,  Justices. 


1st.  Quarter  Sessions 

- 

-  230 

Quarter  Sessions. 

Complaint 

- 

- 

-  230 

Judgment       _         -         _         _  237 

Return    - 

_ 

- 

-  230 

Costs 237 

Hearing 

- 

- 

-   230 

Records,  &c.           .         _        .  237 

Appeal 

- 

- 

-  231 

Erasure,  alteration,  &c.    -  237 

Application 

- 

- 

-  234 

2nd 

.  Petty  Sessions,  Justices,  &c.  239 

Costs 

- 

- 

-  234 

Duties,  &c.     -         -         -         -  239 

Case 

- 

- 

-   235 

Warrant,  &c.  -         -         -  240 

Rehearing 

- 

- 

-  236 

Application     -         -         -  242 

Application 

- 

- 

-   237 

Rule        -         -         -         -  242 

Review 

- 

- 

-  237 

Service     -         -         -  242 

*lst.  Quarter  Sessions.]    Complaint. — If  justices  at  Quarter 


[*230] 


Sessions  refuse  to  entertain  a  complaint,  &c.,  under  an  erroneous 
supposition  that  they  have  no  jurisdiction  to  hear  it,  or  if  the  hearing  be 


(a)  Ante,  p.  108,  n.  (to)  ;  1  Roll.  Abr.  526.     See  tit.  "Office"'  (Office  of  Court). 

\h)  R.  V.  Oxenden,  1  Show.  217.  S.  C.  (as  to  return,  &c.),  1  Show.  251,  nom.  R. 
V.  Lee.  S.  C.  (as  to  second  argument  with  judgment),  1  Show.  261.  S.  C.  3 
Lev.  309  (nom.  R.  v.  Lee).  S.  C.  Holt,  435.  S.  C.  3  Mod.  332  (nom.  Mr.  Leigh's 
case).  S.  C.  Garth.  169.  S.  C.  Skin.  290.  S.  C.  3  Salli.  230.  See  R.  v.  Raines, 
3  Salli.  233,  11,  13.  See  R.  v.  Morpeth  (Bailiffs),  Stra.  58.  See  Clerk  v.  Lee,  10 
Mod.  262;  Ld.  Raym.  959,  989,  1004,  1206,  1244,  1267,  1379,  1405;  1  Roll.  Abr. 
526  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  B.  See  R.  v.  Dr.  Ward,  1  Barn.  295,  381.  R.  v.  Can- 
terbury (Archbishop),  8  East,  216  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C. 

(c)  Ante,  p.  108,  n.  (m).  Leigh's  case,  Carth.  170.  R.  v.  Lee,  3  Lev.  309  ;  Trem. 
PL  Cor.  489,  491,  493,  where  see  form  of  writ.  See  tits.  "Courts  Superior"  (Com- 
mon Pleas),  "  Office"  (Officers  of  Courts). 

(fZ)  Lee  V.  Dr.  Oxenden,  Skin.  290. 

(c)  3  Mod.  334,  supra  ;  Carth.  109,  supra;  3  Lev.  309,  snpra;  Skin.  290,  supra. 
Sec  1  Show.  252,  n.  (J). 


280  tapping's    mandamus, 

illusory;  tbe  Court  of  B.  R.  will  grant  the  writ,  and  thereby  command 
them  to  do  their  duty  iu  order  to  prevent  a  defect  of  justice. (/)  But  if 
such  justices  hear  the  complaint,  and  decide  erroneously,  such  judicial 
decision  being  one  purely  discretionary,  the  Court  of  B.  11.  cannot  inter- 
fere •(</)  for  such  Court  has  no  power  to  command  the  sessions  to  come  to 
a  particular  decision,  as  to  make  an  order  of  maintenance  on  a  particular 
parish. (/()  Nor  does  the  writ  lie  to  compel  obedience  to  an  order  of 
sessions. ((■) 

.]     Rclurn. — A  return,  that  the  complaint  has  been  heard  and 

determined,  is  good.(7J 

.]     Rehearing. — It  is  the  ordinary  practice  of  the  Court  of  B.  R., 

to  grant  the  writ  of  mandamus,  to  command  magistrates  or  the  Quarter 
Sessions  to  hear  and  determine  or  give  judgment  in  cases  within  their 
jurisdiction,  where  they  have  refused  altogether  to  exercise  it,  but  no  in- 
stance can  be  cited  in  which  the  Court  of  B.  B.  has  granted  a  mandamus 
to  compel  them  to  do  a  specific  act,  as  to  come  to  any  particular  deci- 
sion ;(Z:)  for,  after  they  have  once  decided  an  appeal,  &c.,  even  errone- 
ously, or  under  a  mistake  of  law,  such  decision  is  final  and  conclusive. (Z) 
Also  if  the  Quarter  Sessions  should  hear  one  side,  and  altogether  refuse  to 
hear  the  other,  the  Court  would  consider  such  conduct  as  tantamount  to 
a  refusal  to  hear,  and  grant  a  mandamus :  but  where  the  C[uestion  is  one 
peculiarly  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Quarter  Sessions,  as  to  the  prac- 
tice of  the  sessions,  &c.,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  no  jurisdiction  to  inter- 
fere, (m)  So,  where  the  Quarter  Sessions  on  appeal,  decide  on  a  point 
preliminary  to  the  whole  case,  or  to  the  reception  of  a  particular  piece  of 
evidence,  that  they  will  not  hear  the  cause  further,  their  *decision 
L  "  -I  is  conclusive,  if  the  point  involve  matter  of  fact  only,  but  other- 
wise, if  it  raise  a  mere  point  of  practice,  which  the  Court  of  B.  R.,  can 

(f)  Ante,  p.  9,  11.  R.  v.  Cumberland  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  192,  194.  R.  v.  Kent  (J.), 
14  East,  395.  R.  v.  Cumberland  (J.),  4  A.  &  E.  695.-}-  R.  v.  Tod,  Stra.  530.  R. 
v.  Jukes,  8  T.  R.  625.     See  tit.  "  Courts  Inferior"  (Plaint). 

{g)  See  supra,  n.  (/),  and  ante,  p.  12 — 15. 

{h)  R.  v.  Middx.,  4  B.  &  A.  298,t  ante,  p.  218,  n.  (t),  and  infra,  n.  {k). 

{i)  R.  T.  Bristow,  6  T.  R.  168  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.)  See  tits.  "Courts 
Inferior"  (Judgment  and  Execution),  "  Execution."     See  ante,  p.  35,  n.  [y). 

(J)  Ante,  p.  109,  n.  (c).     R.  r.  Richardson,  1  Wils.  21.     See  post,  tit.  "Return." 

(^•j  Ante,  p.  218,  n.  {f}.  R.  v.  Suffolk  (.J.),  5  N.  &  M.  144.t  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E. 
725.f  See  tits.  "  Certiorari,"  "  Court  Inferior"  (Hearing),  "  Inquest."  See  post, 
tit.  "Writ"  (Mandatory  Clause). 

(l)  Ante,  p.  12—15,  109,  n.  (c).  See  tit.  "Courts  Inferior"  (.Judgment,  &c.)  ;  Y 
D.  &  R.  334.t  S.  C.  4  B.  &  C.  849,t  supra.  R.  v.  Cumberland  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  194. 
R.  V.  Leicestersh.  (J.),  1  .M.  &  S.  442.  R.  v.  Westmoreland  (J.),  M.  T.,  23  Geo.  2  ; 
Bott.  734,  3rd  edit.  Bodmin  v.  Warlingen,  Bott.  733.  R.  y.  Chcsh.  (J.),  8  A.  &  E. 
399,  401.t  R.  V.  Monmouthsli.  (J.).  8  B.  &  C.  138.t  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  11 
L.  J.,  N.  S.  57,  M.  C;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.' "Man."  (D.) 

(m)  See  infra,  "Appeal,"  and  ante,  p.  110,  n.  (/).  R.  v.  Carnarron  (J.),  4  B.  & 
A.  88,f  per  Holrojd,  J.     R.  v.  Gloucestersh.  (J.),  1  B.  &  Ad.  l,f  and  see  5  B.  & 

Ad.  597.t     R.  V. (J.),  1  Chit.  164.     In  re  Pratt,  7  A.  &  E.  28.     S.  C.  2  N.  & 

P.  102.  R.  r.  Cumberland  (J.),  4  A.  &  E.  698.f  See  tits.  "Courts  Inferior"  (Re- 
hearing). 


QUARTER     SESSIONS.  281 

perceive  to  be  a  point  of  law,  iu  the  latter  case  a  mandamus  to  hear,  &c., 
will  be  granted,  iu  the  former  not.(«)  But  it  is  no  ground  for  granting 
the  writ,  that  the  Quarter  Sessions  have  refused  to  hear  useless  and  irre- 
levant matter,  which  ought  not  to  aflFect  the  judgment. (o) 

The  Court  of  B.  R.  has  no  jurisdiction  to  interfere  with  the  decision  of 
the  Quarter  Sessions,  where  it  is  final  and  conclusive,  and  a  certiorari  is 
taken  away,  for  such  Court  will  not  by  mandamus  do  that  indirectly  which 
it  is  prohibited  from  doing  directly. (p)  Neither  will  such  Court  grant 
the  writ  if  the  result,  at  which  the  Quarter  Sessions  has  ultimately  arrived 
be  right,  for  the  reasons  of  the  judgment  cannot  be  inquired  into. (5) 
Nor  if  they  have  exercised  a  discretion  in  a  matter  over  which  they  have 
a  discretionary  power.(r)  Nor  where  they,  upon  having  doubts  as  to  the 
validity  of  the  ordei*,  upon  which  the  appeal  is  sought,  superseded  it.(s) 
Nor  where  the  inquiry  can  lead  to  no  good  result,(;)  nor  for  the  purpose 
of  calling  in  question  iu  a  spiritual  Court  the  decision  of  another  such 
Court  of  very  high  authority,  which  in  the  exercise  of  a  similar  jurisdic- 
tion, proclaims  the  illegality  of  the  very  thing  of  which  the  execution  is 
desired. (?() 

•]     -AppcaL — If  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  after  demand  made, 

improperly  refuse  to  go  into  an  appeal,  the  Court  of  B.  E,.  will  compel 
them  so  to  do  by  writ  of  mandamus,  (i-)  So  the  writ  will  lie  where  the 
hearing,  &c.,  is  illusory. (it-)  The  demand  to  hear,  must  however,  have 
been  made  at  a  time  when  the  Sessions  ought  in  due  course  to  have  heard 
and  determined  the  *appeal,(.r)  and  a  right  to  have  the  appeal  heard, 

(n)  R.  T.  Kestcven  (J.),  3  Q.  B.  810.  S.  C.  1  D.  &  M.  113,  distinguishing  R.  v. 
Carnarvonsh.  (J.),  2  Q.  B.  325. f  S.  0.  1  G.  &  D.  423,  which  to  some  extent  is 
erroneous,  and  the  case  of  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  2  Q.  B.  331,-j-whicla  is  still  more 
erroneous.  R.  v.  Frieston  (luhabs.),  5  B.  &  Ad.  o97,t  ^^^  1  B.  &  Ad.  l.f  R.  v. 
Cambridgesh.  (J.),  1  D.  &  R.  325.f     R.  v.  Tucker,  5  D.  &  R.  441.     In  re  Pratt,  T 

A.  &  E.  27,  and  see  1  Q.  B.  G30.f     S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  198.     R.  v.  Carnarvonsh.  (J.),  4 

B.  &  A.  Se.f  R.  V.  Leicestersh.  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  442  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man.''  (D.) 
See  post,  234,  n.  {k). 

(0)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  5  B.  &  Ad.  lOlO.f     R.  v.  Minshull,  1  X.  k  M.  2T7.f 
\p)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  5  B.  &  Ad.  lOOS.f     See  tit.  "Certiorari." 
(5)  Aute,  p.  10.     R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  1  G.  &  D.  630.    S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  VOo.f 
(V)  Ante,  p.  12—15.     R.  v.  Norfolk  (J.),  1  D.  &  R.  69,  74.f     See  tit.  '-Discre- 
tion." 

(.S-)  1  D.  (fc  R.  74,  supra.  But  see  stat.  6  &  7  Yict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  App. ;  and  as  to 
Ireland,  see  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  8,  App.,  and  infra,  "  Warrant." 

(7)  Ante,  p.  15,  16.  R.  v.  Northwich  Savings'  Bank,  9  A.  &  E.  729.f  See  S.  C. 
1  P.  &  D.  477.  R.  V.  Shortridge,  1  D.  &  L.  863.  R.  v.  Sillifant,  5  N.  &  M.  642,f 
u.  [g).     II.  V.  Milverton,  (Manor),  3  A.  &  E.  285.t 

(m)  R.  t.  Thomas,  3  G.  &  D.  490.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  589. f  See  tit.  "  Courts  Su- 
perior." 

(r)  Ante,  p.  12.  See  post,  tit.  "Application"  (Demand  and  Refusal).  R.  v. 
Cambridge  (J.),  2  A.  &  E.  370.t  S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  238.t  R.  v.  Westmoreland  (J.), 
Say.  282.  R.  v.  Worcestersh.  (J.),  9  D.  &  R.  210  ;t  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) 
See  tits.  "Conviction"  (Appeal),  "Court  Inferior"  (Appeal),  "Poor"  (Appeal). 

(tf)  Ante,  R.  v.  Kent  (J.),  14  East,  395.  R.  v.  Cumberland  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  194. 
See  supra,  "  Hearing." 

^.r)  R.  V.  Kent  (J.),  9  B.  &  C.  283,  285.t  See  post,  tit.  "'  Application"  (Demand 
and  Refusal),  (When  to  be  made).  » 


282  TArriNo's    mandamus. 

must  of  course  exist  at  the  time  of  the  application  for  the  ■\Trit,(y) 
i-  -  ^i  otherwise  it  will  be  refused. (2) 

The  writ  lies  to  command  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  or  a  recorder 
to  cuter  any  appeal,  which  thc}'  ought  to  hearj  or  enter  continuances, 
and  hear  and  determine  the  merits  of  such  an  appeal,  and  also  if  the  facts 
of  the  case  warrant  it,  to  take  the  recognizance  of  the  applicant  and  his 
sureties  for  trying  the  appeal,  and  thereupon  forthwith  to  discharge  him 
out  of  custody. (a)  The  Court  may  make  absolute  a  rule  nisi  fur  a  man- 
damus to  hear  an  appeal  upon  certain  specific  grounds  as  upon  the  first, 
second,  fifth,  and  sixth  grounds  of  appeal,  (i) 

The  Court  of  B.  E.  has  repeatedly  held,  that  it  is  not  precluded  from 
inquiring  whether  the  Quarter  Sessions  have  decided  rightly  upon  any 
preliminary  jwint  necessary  to  determine  their  own  jurisdiction  ;(r)  and 
where  the  Sessions  dismiss  an  appeal  on  a  preliminary  point,  and  at  the 
same  time  tender  the  appellants  a  case  which  they  decline  to  accept,  the 
appellants  are  not  thereby  precluded  from  applying  for  a  man- 
L  "  -■  damns  to  enter  continuances  *to  hear  it.(r/)  The  Court  of  B.  R. 
will  always  interpose  against  any  illegal  practice  of  sessions,  whereby  the 

(?/)  1  East,  683,  C8G ;  1  M.  &  S.  470  ;  4  M.  &  S.  327  ;  1  B.  &  A.  210  ;t  4  B.  &  C. 
62  ;t  7  B.  &  C.  GDl.f  E.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  2  T.  R.  504.  R.  v.  Skone,  6  East,  514. 
R.  y.  West  Riding  (J.),  1  Q.  B.  624.t  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  198.  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
85,  M.  C.  R.  V.  Derbysh.  (J.),  1  D.  386.  R.  v.  Derbysh.  (J.),  Nol.  29.  R.  v. 
Lancash.  (J.),  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  110,  M.  C;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  xMan."  (D.)  R.  v.  West 
Riding  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  171,  M.  C,  post,  c.  234,  n.  (n),  (p). 

(z)  R.  V.  Devon  (J.),  4  M.  &  S.  422.  R.  v.  Durham  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  112,  M. 
C,  post,  p.  234,  n.  (0). 

[a)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  y.  Newcastle  (J.),  1  B.  &  Ad.  OSS.f  In  re  Pratt,  7  A.  &  E. 
27-1  R.  V.  Cliesli.  (J.),  8  A.  &  E.  sgg.f  R.  v.  West  Riding  (.!.),  1  G.  &  D.  198. 
S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  G30.f  R.  V.  Carmarthen  (Recorder),  7  A.  &  E.  756.f  R.  v.  West- 
moreland (J.),  Say.  282.  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  2  T.  R.  504.  R.  v.  Chesh.  (J.),  5  B.  & 
Ad.  439.f  R.  y.  Tucker,  3  B.  &  C.  545.1  Ex  parte  Ackwork  (Overseers),  3  Q.  B. 
397.1  R.  y.  Somerset  (J.),  4  B.  &  C.  giS.f  R.  y.  Devon  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  410.  R. 
V.  Monmouthsh.  (J.),  8  B.  &  C.  138.t  R.  v.  Monmouthsh.  (J.),  4B.  &  C.  846.1  R. 
v.  Cheltenham  (Commissioners),  1  Q.  B.  473.t  R.  v.  York  (J.),  2  B.  &  C.  77l.t 
R.  y.  Monmouthsh.  (J.),  1  B.  k  Ad.  897.t  R.  v.  Cartworth  (Inhabs.),  1  D.  &  L. 
844.  R.  V.  Chesh.  (J.),  11  A.  &  E.  139.t  R.  v.  AVcst  Riding  (J.),  1  A.  &  E.  606.f 
R.  y.  Bedfordsh.  (J.),  11  A.  &  E.  134.t  R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.),  11  A.  &  E.  SOg.f  R. 
y.  Suffolk  (J.),  6  A.  &  E.  lOO.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  306.t  R.  v.  Frieston  (Inhabs.),  5 
B.  &  Ad.  597. t  R.  y.  West  Riding  (J.),  5  B.  &  Ad.  lOOS.f  R.  v.  Norfolk  (J.),  5 
B.  &  Ad.  990.f  R.  v.  Dorsetsh.  (J.),  15  East,  200.  R.  v.  Sussex  (J.),  15  East,  200. 
R.  y.  London  (Mayor),  15  East,  632.  R.  v.  Glouccstersh.  (J.),  1  B.  &  Ad.  l.f  R. 
y.  Middlesex  (J.),  16  East,  310.  R.  y.  Lancash.  (J.),  7  B.  &  C.  691.t  R.  v.  Essex, 
2  Chit.  385  ;t  1  N.  &  M.  426  ;t  2  N.  &  M.  390  ;f  3  N.  &  M.  59.t  See  tit.  "  Poor' 
(Removal,  Appeal). 

{b)  Ante,  p.  225,  n.  («■).  R.  y.  Suffolk  (.!.),  1  B.  &  A.  G40.f  See  post,  tits. 
"Rule"  (Absolute),  "  Writ"  (Mandatory  Clause). 

(c)  See  supra,  '-Hearing."  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  P.  &  D.  462.  R.  y.  Staf- 
fordsh.  (J.),  4  A.  &  E.  S42.f  S.  C.  6N.  &  M.  477.t  R.  v.  West  Riding,  5  B.  k  Ad. 
667-1  S.  C.  2  N.  &  M.  390.t  See  1  G.  &  D.  635.  Ex  parte  Pontefract  (Church- 
wardens), 3  G.  &  D.  191.  R.  y.  Carnarvonsh.  (J.),  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  3,  M.  C.  R.  v. 
Surrey  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  46,  M.  C.  S.  C.  3  D.  &  L.  573.  R.  v.  Kent  (J.),  14 
East,  395.  R.  v.  Cumberland  (.1.),  1  M.  &  S.  190.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  See 
tit.  "Courts  Inferior,"  and  ante,  p.  11. 

(d)  Ante,  p.  21,  and  post,  p.  235.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  84 
M.  C. 


QUARTER     SESSIONS.  283 

hearing  of  an  appeal  is  prcventcd(e),  Lut  the  Court  will  not  interfere  with 
such  practice,  unless  it  appear  to  have  been  manifestly  wrong  or  un- 
just.(/)  Thus,  the  Court  will  command  the  Quarter  Sessions  to  hear  an 
appeal  which  has  been  dismissed  for  noncompliance  with  the  rule  laid 
down  by  them  as  to  giving  notice  of  appeal,  if  it  think  that  justice  will 
be  most  satisfactorily  administered  by  so  doing,  for  although  the  Quarter 
Sessions  has  a  discretionary  power  to  make  rules  for  the  governance  of  its 
practice,  yet  the  Court  of  B.  11.  will,  for  the  purposes  of  justice,  interfere 
and  control  that  discretion.  (^) 

The  appeal  must,  however,  be  duly  entered,  and  every  necessary  step 
taken,  otherwise  the  Court  will  not,  by  mandamus,  command  it  to  be 
heard,  (/t) 

The  sufficiency  of  grounds  of  appeal  in  point  of  particularity  of  state- 
ment is  a  question  for  the  Sessions,  and  where  they  have  come  to  a  de- 
cision upon  the  point,  the  Court  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  to  enter  con- 
tinuances and  hear  the  appeal. (0  So,  if  the  Quarter  Sessions  have  decided 
a  question  of  fact  proper  for  their  decision,  the  Court  will  not  grant  a 
mandamus  to  hear  the  appeal. Q') 

*If,  however,  the  sessions  dismiss  an  appeal  upon  a  point  of  law  p^..o34-] 
which  they  have  wrongly  decided,  the  Court  will  set  them  right,  L  " 
and  command  them  to  enter  and  hear  the  appeal.(7^) 

(e)  Aiite,  p  231  :  5  B.  &  Ad.  GGl.f  S.  C.  2  N.  &  M.  390  ;t  3  G.  &  D.  191,  supra. 
B.  T.  Wiltsh.  (J.),  4  M  &  R.  401.  S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  SSO.f  R-  v.  Suffolk  (J.),  4  Jur. 
390.     R.  V.  Norfolk  (J.),  5  B.  &  Ad.  990.t     S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  55.t 

(/)  Ante,  p.  230,  231,  R.  v.  Wiltshire  (J.),  10  East,  404.  E.  v.  Essex  (J.),  2  Chit. 
3'85.t  R.  V.  Suffolk  (J.),  6  M.  &  S.  58.  R.  v.  Warwicksh.  (J.),  6  Q.  B.  751.t  S.  C. 
14  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  39,  M.  C.  The  affidavits  should  state  the  practice  by  annexing  the 
rules,  or  otherwise.     R.  v.  Mongomerysh.  (J.),   3   D.   &  L.    119.     Bac.  Abr.  tit. 

"  Man."  ( D.)  s  ►,  „    .  r. 

(^)Ante,  p.  12—15.  R.  v.  Wiltsh.  (J.),  10  East,  404.  R.v.  Lancash.  (.J.),7  B.  &L. 
692.1  R.  V.  West  Riding  ( J.),  IN.&M.  43  l.f  R.  v.Derbysh.  (J.),  G  A.&E.  SSS.f  S.  C. 
1  N.&P.  148,tn.  (a.)  R.v.  West  Riding  (J.),  4  B.  &Ad.  GSS.f  R.v.  West  Riding  (J.), 
1  A.  &  E.  GOO.f  S.C.  3N.  &  M.  757.t  R.  v.Norfolk  (J.),  5  B.  &  Ad.  990.t  R.  v.  Ox- 
fordsh.  (J.),  3  G.  &  D.  348.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  l^.f  S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  40  M.  C.  R.  v. 
Denbysh.  (J.),  9  D.  509  ;  5  Jur.  99.  R.  v.  Cornwall  (J.),  5  A.  &  E.  134.f  S.  C.  1 
N.  &  P.  144.t  S.  C.  2  H.  &  W.  157.  R.  v.  Bedfordsh.  (J.),  9  L.  J.  R.,  N.  S.,  3,  M. 
C.  R.  V.  Chesh.  (J.),  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  89,  M.  C.  R.  v.  West  Riding,  (J.),  13  L.  J.,  N. 
S.  39,  M.  C.  R.  V.  Middlesex  (J.),  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  139,  M.  C.  See  R.  v.  Montgomery 
(J.),  3  D.  &  L.  119.  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  142,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  Iv. 
S.  46,  M.  C.  S.  C.  3  D.  &  L.  573.  R.  v.  London  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  127,  M.  C. 
R.  T.  AVest  Riding  (J.),  3  D.  &  L.  152.  R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.),  3  D.  &  L.  745.  R.  v. 
Suffolk  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  36,  M.  C.     See  tit.  "  Discretion." 

(h)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Salop  (J.),  4  B.  &  A.  626.t  R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.),  9  L. 
J.,  N.  S.  59,  M.  C.     Supra,  p.  231,  232. 

(«)R.  v.Kesteven(J.).  1  D.  &  M.  113.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  SlO.f  S.C.  13  L.  J.,  >..  S., 
78  M.  C.  R.  V.  Caernarvon  (J.),  1  G.  &  D.  423.  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  3  M.  C.  R.  v. 
Derbysh.  (J.),  1  N.  &  P.  703,t  S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  248.  R.  v.  Sussex  (J.),  9  L.  J., 
N.  S.  22,  M.  C.  R.  V.  Staffbrdsh.  (J.),  12  L.  J.  N.  S.  9  M.  C.  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  13 
L.  J.,  N.  S.  86,  M.  C.  R.  v.  Staffordsh.  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  53  M.  C.  R.  v.  Somer- 
setsh.  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  86,  M.  C.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  R.  v.  Monmouthsb. 
(J.),  4  B.  &  C.  844:  and  R.  v.  Worcestersh.  (J.),  1  Chit.  649. 

(y)  Ante,  p.  230,  231.  R.  v.  Flintsh.  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  55,  M.  C.  See  supra. 
"Hearing,"  "Courts  Inferior,"  (Hearing). 

{k)  Ante  p.  231,  n.  {n).     R.  v.  Somersetsh.  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  86,  M.  C. 


284  tapping's    mandamus. 

The  writ  docs  not  lie  to  command  the  dismissal  of  an  appeal  pending 
at  Quarter  Ssssion.(^) 

The  Court  of  B.  R.  will,  in  some  cases,  suspend  the  issuing  of  a  manda- 
mus in  order  to  give  time  to  an  appeal,  but  not  if  they  entertain  no  doubt 
upon  the  point  proposed  for  their  consideration. (???) 

.  A^yplication. — The  application  of  the  Court  of  B.  R.  must  be 

made  within  a  reasonable  time  after  the  right  has  accrued,  or  the  refusal 
has  been  madc,(??)  or  the  writ  will  be  refused.  It  is  a  rule  of  practice, 
that  a  writ  for  the  above  purpose  must  be  applied  for  promptly  and 
speedily  after  the  sessions  at  which  it  should  have  been  heard;  in  general 
it  should  be  made  during  the  term  in  which,  or  that  next  following  the 
time  the  appeal  was  refused  or  dismissed,(o)  or  the  Court  will  not  en- 
tertain the  application ;  but  under  special  circumstances  the  Court  will 
entertain  it  even  after  that  period. (jj) 

Only  those  magistrates  who  at  Sessions  take  part  in  a  decision  should 
be  brought  before  the  Court  of  B.  R.  on  an  application  for  the  writ ; 
therefore,  those  who,  though  present,  do  not  take  part  should  not  be 
brought  before  the  Court,  if  so,  the  rule  will  be  discharged  with  costs, 
notwithstanding  it  may  not  clearly  appear  whether  the  prosecutor  knew 
that  those  magistrates  took  no  i^art  in  the  decision,  if  he  knew  enough  to 
lead  him  to  make  some  inquiry  as  to  them,  and  even  if  he  did  not  know 
that  they  did  not  take  part  in  the  matter  and  he  was  not  misled,  the  rule 
will  follow  the  same  course  which  is  adopted  where  unsuccessful  applica- 
tions are  made  against  magistrates. (g) 

.]   Costs. — If  a  rule  nisi  for  a  mandamus  to  hear  an  appeal  have 

been  obtained  upon  affidavits  imperfectly  stating  the  grounds  upon  which 
the  Sessions  proceeded  in  their  judgment,  and  the  facts  submitted  are 
substantial  and  material  to  the  case,  the  Court  Mall  discharge  the  rule 
with  costs. (r)  So,  where  a  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  dismissed  an  appeal 
upon  a  frivolous  objection,  and  on  a  rule  nisi  for  a  mandamus  to  hear 
being  afterwards  obtained,  the  respondent  parish  shewed  cause  relying  on 
r:i:9QK-|  such  objection,  the  *Court  under  the  discretion  given  by  stat.  1 
Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  6,  ordered  such  respondent  parish  to  pay  the 
costs,  (s) 

{I)  R.  v.  Wilts.  (J.),  2  Chit.  257-1     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.) 

[m)  R.  V.  East  India  Company,  4  M.  &  S.  279,  cited  in  R.  v.  East  India  Company, 
1  N.  &  M.  352.f     See  tit.  "  East  India  Compan}-,"  and  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

{n)  R.  V.  Chesb.  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  K  S.  113,\m.  C.     See  post,  tit.  "Application." 

(o)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  1  G  &  D.  706,  708,  709,  per  Ld.  Denman,  C.  J.  S.  C.  2 
Q.  B.  505,t  n.  {a.)  S.  C.  6  Jur.  50G.  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  80,  M.  C.  R.  v.  Cheshire 
(J.),  4  D.  &  L.  94.     S.  C.  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  114,  M.  C.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

[p]  R.  V.  Norwich  (J.),  3  D.  &  R.  47.f 

(g)R.  v.  Wilts  (J.),  8  D.  717,  722;  4  Jur.  460,  and  see  R.  t.  Ellis,  2  D.,  X.  S. 
361 ;  4  A.  &  E.  354.+     See  post,  tits.  "  Application,"  "  Costs." 

(7-)R.  T.  W.  R.  (J.),  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  119,  M.  C.  See  post,  tits.  "Application," 
"Costs"  (Affidavits),  "Rule." 

(s)  R.  T.  Surrey  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  X.  S.  117,  M.  C.  See  post,  tit.  "  Costs." 


QUARTER     SESSIONS.  285 

].  Case. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  issue  a  mandamus  to  com- 
mand a  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  to  grant  a  case,  that  being  a  matter  of 
pure  discretion  (^),  altliougli  under  special  circumstances  it  may  issue  to 
command  the  sessions  to  state  a  case. (it)  But  it  will  not  do  so  where  it  is 
clear  that  such  a  proceeding  can  lead  to  no  useful  result,  as  where  the 
chairman,  in  consequence  of  his  own  opinion  and  that  of  the  Court  upon 
the  f\xcts,  refused  to  sign  any  statement  but  one,  which  would  have  ex- 
cluded the  point  of  law  relied  upon  by  the  party  demanding  the  case.(y) 
But  if  the  sessions  have  granted  a  case,  then  the  court  of  B.  11.  will  not, 
except  under  special  circumstances,  interfere  by  mandamus, («•)  although 
the  applicants  have  not  brought  the  case  up,  provided  there  be  no  default 
on  the  part  of  the  justices  ;  because  as  a  mandamus  lies  only  where  there 
is  no  other  remedy,  and  the  case  so  sent  gives  the  opportunity  of  a  com- 
plete and  ready  remedy  for  any  misdecision,  it  follows,  that  if  the  justices 
have  themselves  provided  a  complete  remedy  by  granting  a  case,  neither 
of  the  parties  can  successfully  abandon  such  remedy  and  apply  for  a  man- 
damus, (a;)  It  has  been  settled  that  if  the  case  be  not  brought  up,  the 
Court  of  B.  R.  will  refuse  to  hear  the  point  discussed  on  an  application 
for  a  writ  to  enter  continuances,  and  hear  the  aiipeal.(y)  But  if  the  jus- 
tices cannot  agree  for  several  sessions  on  the  terms  of  the  case,  the  Court 
of  B.  R.  will  grant  a  mandamus  to  enter  and  hear  the  appeal,  for  the 
Court  cannot,  as  before  stated,  command  them  by  mandamus  to  grant  a 
case.(-:;)  The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not,  however,  entertain  a  case  where 
an  alternative  of  the  question  presented  for  their  decision  involves  the 
necessity  of  sending  the  appeal  back  to  the  sessions  to  be  heard. (a) 

Where  the  sessions  have  granted  a  special  case  which  has  not  been 
settled  within  six  months  after  having  been  granted,  and  therefore  the 
certiorari  for  removing  the  orders  of  magistrates  and  sessions  has  not  been 
sued  out  within  six  months  from  the  time  of  granting  the  case  as  it  should 
have  been,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  to  com-  pf:,^op-| 
mandthe  ^sessions  to  enter  continuances  and  hear  the  appeal. (i) 

{t)  Ante,  p.  12—15.  Peat's  case,  6  Mod.  229.  R.  v.  Suffolk  (J.),  1  D.  1G3,  and 
see  1  D.  &  L.  844.     See  tit.  "Poor"  (Case). 

{u)  Ex  parte  Jarvin  (Inhabs.),  9  D.  120.  R.  v.  Pembrokesh.  (J.),  2  B.  &  Ad. 
391. f     R.  V.  Effingham  there  cited.     See  ante,  p.  219. 

(v)  Ante,  p.  15,  16,  n.  {w),  27,  28.     R.  v.  Pembrokesh.  (J.),  2  B.  &  Adol.  391.f 

(?y)  R.  v.  Kesteven,  1  D.  &  M.  115.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  810.f  S.  0.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  78, 
M.  C.  R.  V.  Suffolk  (J.),  6  A.  &  E.  lOg.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  SOG.f  See  R.  v.  West 
Riding  (J.),  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  84,  M.  C,  where  it  is  laid  down  that  if  the  sessions 
merely  volunteer  a  case,  which  is  declined  by  the  prosecutor,  his  right  to  a  man- 
damus is  not  thereby  prejudiced. 

(.r)  Ante,  p.  21.  R.  v.  Cartworth  (Inhabs.),  1  D.  &  L.  844.  R.  v.  West  Riding 
(J.),  1  A.  &  E.  60G,  607.f  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  757.t  R.  v.  Carnarvon  (J.),  4  B.  &  A. 
SG.f 

(y)  R.  v.  Suffolk  (J.),  6  A.  &  E.  109.f     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  306.f 

\z)  R.  V.  Suffolk  (J.),  1  D.  1G3.     See  1  D.  &  L.  844.     Peat's  case,  6  Mod.  229. 

(a)  R.  V.  AVistow,  1  G.  &  D.  681,  cited  in  R.  v.  Kesteven,  1  D.  &  11.  IIG.  S.  C. 
3  Q.  B.  810.     See  ante,  p.  16,  n.  {iv). 

{b)  R.  T.  Staffords.  (J.),  1  D.  484.  R.  v.  Pembrokesh.  (J.),  2  B.  &  Adol.  391.f 
See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 


286  tapping's    mandamus. 

In  all  similar  cases  wbcrc  the  Court  has  interfered  by  mandamus,  such 
proceedings  had  been  taken  by  the  appellant,  that  if  the  case  had 
been  settled,  the  matter  might  have  been  discussed  in  the  Court  of  B. 

11.(0 

TIio  Court  will  sometimes  withhold  a  peremptory  mandamus  to 
hear  an  appeal,  in  order  that  the  justices  may,  in  the  mean  time,  state  a 
casc.(r^) 

.]     ReJiearlng. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the  Quarter 

Sessions  to  rehear  an  appeal,  although  erroneously  decided ;  because  as  " 
the  Court  of  B.  R.  is  not  a  Court  of  appeal  from  such  Court,  so  it  has  no 
jurisdiction  to  review  the  judgment  thereof,  except  on  a  case  sent  up  for 
their  consideration  ;  and  therefore  where  the  sessions  after  having  heard 
the  witnesses  on  one  side,  refused  to  hear  those  on  the  other,  on  the  ground 
that  their  testimony  had  been  prefaced  by  observations  on  the  part  of  the 
advocate  contrary  to  the  usual  practice,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  refused  to 
grant  a  mandamus  to  rehear  the  appeal,  on  the  ground  that  it  had  no 
power  to  command  the  rehearing  of  an  appeal  which  had  been  once  heard,  (e) 
So  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not,  by  this  writ,  constitute  itself  a 
Court  of  appeal  from  Quarter  Sessions  ]{f^  if,  therefore,  the  sessions  have 
either  heard  or  disposed  of  an  appeal,  &c.,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not 
command  tlie  rehearing  of  it.(y) 

The  writ  docs  not  lie  to  command  a  justice  to  hear  a  charge  of  felony 
after  it  has  been  dismissed  by  the  sessions.  (7^)  Nor  will  a  rehearing  be 
granted  after  judgment  given  by  the  justices  and  entered  by  the  clerk  of 
the  peace  for  quashing  an  order,  upon  the  ground  that  the  justices  at 
sessions  were  divided  in  opinion,  and  that  the  judgment  was  entered 
by  mistake  instead  of  an  adjournment  of  the  appeal. (^)  And  notwith- 
standing that  the  Quarter  Sessions  may  promote  the  application  to  the 
Court,  for  as.  they  have  the  power  to  rehear,  they  may  do  so  without  a 

[c)  1  D.  48Y.     Supra,  n.  (,6),  and  ante,  27,  28. 

[d)  1  D.  1G9,  supra,  n.  (y),  and  p.  234,  n.  (m).  See  tit.  "  East  India  Com- 
pany." 

[e)  Ante,  p.  21,  28.  R.  v.  Carnarvon  (J.),  4  B.  &  Ad.  86.1  In  re  Pratt,  7  A.  & 
E.  27.t  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  102.  Ex  parte  Brosely,  7  A.  &  E.  423.f  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P. 
355.  R.  V.  Pontefract  (Recorder),  2  Q.  B.  548.t  S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  700.  R.  v.  Wilts. 
(.1.),  2  Chit.  257  ;t  and  see  4  B.  &  Ad.  SDS.f  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  N.  &  M.  SD.f 
R.  V.  Monmouthsh.  (J.),  7  D.  &  R.  334.f  S.  C.  4  B.  &  C.  849.f  See  tits.  "Courts 
Inferior"  (Rehearing),  "  Certiorari." 

(/)  R.  T.  Buckinghamsh.  (J.),  2  G.  &  D.  560.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  1  Q.  B. 
G24.f  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  198.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  G.  &  D.  173.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B. 
l.f     See  tit.  "Certiorari,"  and  ante,  p.  10,  11. 

[g)  Ante,  p.  231,  222.  R.  v.  Dean,  2  Q.  B.  731.t  Ex  parte  Ackworth,  3  Q.  B. 
397.t     IQ  re  Pratt,  7  A.  &  E.  27.t     S.  C.  2  N.  P.  102.t     R.  v.  Gloucestersh.  (J.),  1 

B.  &  Ad.  3.t  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  1  Q.  B.  630.t  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  205.  As  to 
what  is  a  hearing,  see  R.  v.  Kent  (J.),  14  East,  397 ;  1  B.  &  Ad.  4,  5.f  See  tit. 
"  Certiorari." 

[h)  2  Q.  B.  731,1  supra,  and  ante,  p.  13. 

{i)  R.  V.  Leicestersh.  (J.),  1  M.  t  S.  442.    See  alsD  7  D.  k  R.  334.f    S.  C.  4  B.  & 

C.  844.f     See  post,  p.  237—239. 


QUARTER     SESSIONS.  287 

mandamus ;  and  tlicreforc  in  8ucli  a  case  the  Court  of  B.  K.  will  refuse 
the  ■writ.(_;') 

*The  confirmation  of  an  appeal  at  Quarter  Sessions  does  not  pre-  |-:(:.-,o--i 
vent  a  mandamus  to  hear  ;(/.•)  neither  does  the  dismissal. (/) 

•]     Application. — The  applicants   must  shew  themselves  strictly 

entitled  to  the  mandamus. («i.) 

.]     Iteview. — "Where  the  sessions  have  declined  to  hear  a  ease  or 

an  appeal,  on  a  preliminary  objection  shutting  out  the  merits  of  the  case, 
such -decision  may  be  reviewed  by  the  Court  of  B.  Il.(«)  But  the  writ 
docs  not  lie  to  command  the  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  to  review  their 
decision  on  an  appeal,  except  on  a  case  stated,  on  the  ground  that  the 
adjudication  was  not  warranted  by  the  evidence;  the  Court  of  Quarter 
Sessions  being  the  sole  judges  of  the  effect  of  evidence  laid  before 
thera.(o)  And  it  may  be  taken  as  a  rule,  that  where  justices  of  the 
peace  in  or  out  of  sessions,  have  acted  within  their  jurisdiction  and  duty, 
and  according  to  the  best  of  their  judgment,  a  mandamus  will  seldom  be 
granted  commanding  them  to  review  their  judgment. (p) 

.]     Jadjment. — The  writ  lies  to  command  a  Quarter  Sessions  to 

enforce  the  judgment  of  a  previous  sessions,  no  unnecessary  delay  having 
occurred ;  for  in  the  absence  of  any  particular  restriction,  a  subsequent 
Quarter  Sessions  has  such  power. (g') 

■ .]      Costs. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  the  award  of  costs  in  a 

matter  wherein  such  an  award  is  compulsory.  (/•) 

.]     Records  of  Quarter   Sessions,  Erasure,  tOc. — The   Court   of 

Quarter  Sessions  has  no  power  to  erase  an  entry  from  the  records  of  a  past 

[j]  Ante,  15,  IG.    R.  v.  Gamble,  11  A.  &  E.  eo.f  cited  in  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.), 

1  Q.  B.  GSO.f     S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  205.     See  post,  tit.  "Application." 

(/f)  R.  V.  Lindsey  (J.),  G  M.  &  S.  379.  R.  v.  Hertfordsh.  (J),  4  B.  t  Ad.  SGl.f 
R.  v.  Derbysh.  (J.j,  6  A.  &  E.  889.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  148,t  n.  (a).  See  ante, 
p.  11. 

(;)  R.  T.  Lancashire  (J.),  7  B.  &  C.  691. f  G  A.  &  E.  889.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
148,1  n.  («),  supra,  and  see  4  M.  &  S.  327  ;  8  B.  &  C.  G40.f  6  M.  &  S.  395.  See 
tit.  "  Courts  Inferior." 

(w)  Ante,  p.  27,  28 ;  4  M.  &  S.  327,  supra.  R.  v.  Hereford  (J.),  3  T.  R.  504.  See 
post,  tit.  "  Application." 

[n]  Ante,  p.  9,  per  Coleridge,  J.     R.  K.  Carnarvonsh.  (J.),  1  G.  &  D.  426.     S.  C. 

2  Q.  B.  325.t  R.  v.  Gloucestersh.  (J.),  1  B.  &  Ad.  5.  See  supra,  "  Hearing,"  «  Ap. 
peal,"  and  tit.  "Inferior  Courts"  (Review.) 

(o)  Ante,  p.  236,  n.  (e).    R.  v.  Worcestersh.  (J.j,  1  Chit.  G49.f    R.  r.  Devon  (J.), 

1  Chit.  34.t     R.  T.  The  Justices  of ,  1  Chit.  164.1    R.  v.  Monmouthsh.  (J.  , 

7  D.  &  R.  334.f     S.  C.  4  B.  &  C.  849.1     R.  v.  Suffolk  (J.),  5  X.  &  M.  144.t     S.  C. 

3  A.  &  E.  725.f  R.  v.  Leicestersh.  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  442.  R.  v.  Westmoreland  (J.), 
M.  T.  23  Geo.  2,  Bott.  734,  5th  edit.  Bodmin  v.  Warlingen,  Bott.  733.  R.  v. 
Chesh.  (J.),  8  A.  &  E.  399,  401.f  R.  v.  Monmouthsh.  (J.),  8  B.  &  C.  138.t  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) 

(}})  Ante,  p.  12—15.     R.  v.  Radnor  (Earl),  4  Jur.  460. 

{q)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Warwicksh.  (J.),  2  A.  &  E.  768.f  1  D.  &  L.  145.  See 
infra,  "Records,  &c."  And  sec  tits.  "Execution,"  "Inferior  Courts"  (Judg- 
ment, &c.) 

(r)  R.  Y.  Monmouthsh.  (J.),  1  D.  &  L.  145.  See  tits.  "Costs,"  "Poor,"  (Relief, 
Costs.)     And  see  post,  tit.  "  Costs." 


288  tapping's    mandamus. 

session. (s)  T>ut  a  nifindamus  will  Lc  granted  to  command  siicli  Court  to 
do  so  where  an  entry  has  been  made  which  is  either  manifestly  false,  and 
r*-')QSl  ^^^°  "■'fi'^G  without  ^jurisdiction,  or  where  it  may  prejudice  a  future 
proceeding,  as  an  appeal. (/)  But  not  where  the  entry  is  perfectly 
harmless  and  innocuous, (w)  or  where  it  is  made  in  a  matter  over  which  the 
Court  of  Quarter  Sessions  has  jurisdiction.  Thus,  where  the  Quarter 
Sessions,  having  jurisdiction  over  an  appeal,  directed  an  entry  to  be  made, 
that  an  order  of  removal  had  been  "quashed  not  on  the  merits/'  the 
Court  of  B.  B.  refused  to  grant  a  mandamus  to  command  an  erasnre  of 
that  entry,  although  it  appeared  that  the  order,  in  point  of  fact,  was 
quashed  on  the  merits. (t')  Nor  can  the  Court  of  B.  R.  direct  the  Court 
of  Quarter  Sessions  to  alter  the  minutes  of  a  verdict  given  on  an  indict- 
ment, although  neither  regularly  nor  truly  recorded;  in  such  a  case, 
application  for  relief  should  be  made  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  (w) 

The  writ  will,  however,  be  granted  to  command  the  Court  of  Quarter 
Sessions  to  make  up  a  record  according  to  the  facts ;  thus,  where  a  party 
has  been  found  guilt}'  at  a  sessions  irregularly  holden,  he  is  entitled  to 
have  the  record  of  the  proceedings  correctly  made  up,  and  after  demand 
and  refusal  the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  for  that  purpose. (ar)  So 
the  Court  constantly  commands,  by  mandamus,  that  continuances  be 
entered,  which  is  only  supplying  a  similar  defect. (^)  But  it  has  been 
held,  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  command  the  rectification  of  an 
error  in  the  record  of  a  judgment  of  Quarter  Sessions;  for  the  Court  of 
B.  R.  cannot,  in  order  to  supply  a  remedy,  exercise  a  jurisdiction  which 
does  not  belong  to  them.(,:-)  For  if  any  error  have  been  made  in  the 
entry  of  the  clerk  of  the  peace,  that  error  should  have  been  pointed  out 
at  the  sessions  while  the  Court  was  sitting,  and  competent  to  reform  its 
own  errors,  and  to  draw  out  a  correct  judgment :  if  such  an  application 
were  entertained,  the  consequence  would  be,  that  the  Court  of  B.  R. 

(s)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  G.  &  D.  ITO.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  l.f  S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N. 
S.  148,  M.  C,  (vs'here  see  form  of  writ).  It  is  the  only  case  as  to  tiie  erasure  of  an 
entry,  and  was  one  of  a  very  peculiar  nature,  and  not  according  to  precedent.  1 
D.  &  L.  ns.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  397. t  See  tits.  "  Conviction"  (Record,)  "Courts  Infe- 
rior" (Record).     See  ante,  p.  94,  n.  (rr). 

(t)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  G.  &  D.  170.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  l.f  Ex  parte  Ponte- 
fract  (Overseers),  3  Q  B.  391.f     S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  188.     See  ante,  p.  9,  10. 

(u)  B.  V.  Cornwall  (J.),  5  Q.  B.  9,f  n.  [a).  But  see  3  Q.  B.  397.f  S.  C.  1  D.  & 
L.  718,  supra.     R.  v.  Glamorgansh.  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  110,  M.  C. 

(i')  Ex  parte  Ackworth  (Overseers),  1  D.  &  L.  718.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  397.t  S.  C. 
13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  38,  M.  C. 

(«•)  R.  V.  Hewes,  3  A.  &  E.  725.f  S.  C.  5  X.  &  M.  139.t  And  see  R.  t.  West 
Riding  (J.),  5  Q.  B.  S.f  S.  C.  1  D.  &  M.  590.  S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  170.  R.  v.  Carlyle, 
2  B.  &  Ad.  97l.f  See  tits.  "  Compensation"  (Company,  Judgment),  '•  Courts  Infe- 
rior" (Records,  &c.) 

(z)  R.  V.  Middlesex  (J.),  5  B.  &  Ad.  1113.t  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  110,t  cited  in  5  Q. 
B.  5.t  S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  170,  supra.  See  tits.  "  Conviction"  (Records,  &c.),  "  Courts 
Inferior"  (Records,  &c.) 

(.'/)  Ante,  p.  232,  n.  (a).  R.  v.  Suffolk  (J.),  5  N.  &  M.  144.t  See  tit.  ''Poor" 
(Ap;)eal). 

(z)  Ante,  p.  80,  n.  {z).  R.  v.  Leicestcrsh.  (J  ),  1  M.  &  S.  444.  See  tit.  "Courts 
Inferior." 


QUARTER     SESSIONS.  289 

would  have  on  all  occasions  to  look,  not  to  the  record  alone,  but  to  extra- 
neous matter,  in  order  to  see  how  the  judgment  of  the  justices  at  sessions 
was  obtained,  which  it  will  not  do;  nor  when  judgment  has  been  finally 
pronounced,  will  it  hold  a  sort  of  ballotting  box  to  ascertain  the  votes 
that  were  given,  or  whether  they  were  correctly  cast  up.  (a)  So,  it  r:i:r)Qn-| 
has  been  held,  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  no  authority  to  com- 
maud  the  Quarter  Sessions,  by  mandamus,  to  give  their  reasons  for  their 
judgments,  or  make  any  special  entries  upon  their  records;  and  a  rule  for 
such  a  mandamus  will  be  discharged  with  costs,  for  the  reason  of  the 
judgment  must  be  collected  from  the  record ;  in  fact,  an  application  for 
this  purpose  has  always  been  refuscd.(/j)  Thus,  where  the  Quarter  Ses- 
sions on  appeal  have  quashed  an  order  generally,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will 
not  command  them,  by  mandamus,  to  enter  their  reasons  on  the  order  to 
quash,  though  it  appear  by  affidavit  that  the  justices  in  sessions  made 
their  order  on  the  ground  of  informality,  but  refused  a  special  entry  of 
their  grounds,  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  a  second  removal.(c)  Nor 
will  the  Court  grant  a  mandamus  to  command  the  Quarter  Sessions,  or 
the  clerk  of  the  peace,  to  enter  up  judgment  upon  the  verdict  of  a  jury, 
otherwise  than  in  the  terms  in  which  it  is  given  by  the  jury,  even  though 
it  appear  by  affidavit,  that  in  considering  the  amount  of  damages  to  be 
assessed  by  them,  they  took  into  consideration  matters  not  properly  within 
their  jurisdiction. (fZ) 

.  2nd  Petty  Sessions,  Justices,  &c.].  Duties. — If  justices  or 

justices  in  Petty  Sessions  improperly  refuse  to  hear,  or  otherwise  impro- 
perly neglect  to  enter  upon  the  discharge  of  their  duties,  &c.,  the  Court 
of  B.  R.  will  grant  a  mandamus  and  command  them  to  do  their  duty ; 
but  not  if  such  refusal  or  neglect  do  not  involve  a  defect  of  justice.(e) 
Thus,  where  magistrates,  after  having  taken  the  examination  of  a  pauper, 
brought  before  them  with  a  view  to  make  an  order  of  removal,  which  they 
declined  to  make,  on  the  ground  that  the  examination  disclosed  a  settle- 
ment in  the  applicant's  parish,  the  Court  refused,  upon  a  suggestion  that 
the  refusal  was  founded  upon  erroneous  grounds,  to  grant  a  writ  of  man- 
fa)  1  M.  &  S.  444;  and  see  1  Chit.  34,f  and  2  Salk.  G07.  In  R.  v.  "West  Riding 
(.J.),  5  Q.  B.  5,f  per  Lord  Denman,  C.  J.,  it  was  said,  that  the  wonder  was  that  a 
rule  nisi  was  granted  in  R.  a\  Devon  (J.),  1  Chit.  34.f  See  "  Courts  Inferior" 
(Records,  Alteration). 

(6)  R.  v.  Devon  (J.),  1  Chit.  34.f  South  Cadbury  v.  Braddon,  2  Salk.  GOT.  But 
see  5  Q.  B.  5,f  where  Lord  Denman,  C.  J.,  says,  that  "  it  is  a  wonder  that  a  rule 
nisi  was  granted  in  that  case" — (1  Chit.  34. )f     See  supra,  "  Judgment." 

(c)  R.  v.  Lancash.  (J.),  3  Q.  B.  367.t  S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  714.  S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S., 
TO,  M.  C.  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  1  G.  &  D.  206.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  624.1  R.  v.  Wheel- 
ock,  5  B.  &  C.  Sll.f 

{d)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  N.  &  M.  802.f  See  tit.  "Compensation"  (Judg- 
ment.) 

(e)  Ante,  p.  9.  Caly  v.  Hardy,  Holt,  407.  R.  v.  Cumberland  (J.),  4  A.  &  E.  695.f 
R.  y.  West  Riding  (J.),  1  G.  &  D.  198.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  G29.t  R.  v.  Rogers,  2  D.,N. 
S.  6T3.  R.  V.  Beard,  12  East,  6V2.  R.  v.  Derbysh.  (J.),  4  T.  R.  488.  R.  v.  Cory, 
3  Salk.  230,  6.  R.  v.  Tod,  Stra.  530.  R.  \.  Jukes,  8  T.  R.  625.  See  tits.  "  Act 
of  Parliament,"  "  Courts  Inferior,"  supra,  p.  105,  "  Inferior  Courts,"  "  Ofiicers." 

May,  1852.— 19 


290  tapping's    mandamus. 

damns  to  tlic  justices  to  command  them  to  make  such  order. (/)  Also, 
as  before  stated,  the  writ  docs  not  lie  to  command  them,  as  judicial  offi- 
cers, to  act  in  any  particular  mode,  unless  it  be  clear  that  the  magistrates 
have  neglected  some  duty  imposed  upon  them  by  law;(.y)  although  it  lies 
to  command  them  to  proceed  and  give  judgment  on  a  complaint  pending 
before  them,  over  which  they  have  jurisdiction;  but  a  return  that  they 
r*oj.ni  ^^^^  heard  and  determined  the  ^complaint,  is  good.(7i)     The  writ 

"  does  not  lie  to  command  justices  to  do  that  which  they  arc  not 
legally  bound  to  do,  or  to  exercise  a  doubtful  jurisdiction ;  for  the  Court 
will  see  clearly  that  the  magistrates  have  neglected  some  duty  imposed 
upon  them  by  law,  before  it  will  command  them  to  act  in  any  particular 
modc.((')  Nor  will  the  Court  command  certain  justices  to  do  that  which 
others  could  not  do  with  greater  propriety. (y)  It  may  be  stated  to  be  a 
general  rule,  that  where  any  two  of  many  magistrates  assembled  at  Petty 
Sessions,  improperly  refuse  to  do  an  act  which  two  may  perform,  a 
mandamus  will  lie  against  them(  /»•)  alone  for  the  performance  of  such 
duty. 

].      Warrant. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  command  justices  to 

do  an  act,  as  to  grant  and  issue  a  distress  warrant  if  there  be  another 
remedy. (^)  Nor  formerly  unless  the  Court  saw  cIcarJf/ that  the  act  would 
be  legal,(7?i)  and  not  reasonahlij  subject  them  to  an  action,  the  event  of 
which  would  be  doubtful  ;(?*)  for  until  lately  the  mandamus  was  no  in- 
demnity to  the  magistrates  who  executed  it.(o)  Thus  where  a  pai'ty  who 
had  been  convicted  and  sentenced,  gave  notice  of  appeal,  and  was  com- 

(  f)  R.  V.  Rogers,  2  D.,  N.  S.  6V.3.    S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  X.  S.  51,  M.  C. 

[g)  Ante,  p.  9,  10.  R.  v.  North  Riding,  2  B.  &  C.  290.t  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 
(D.)     See  post,  tit.  "  Writ "  (Form). 

[h]  Ante,  p.  231,  n.  («).  R.  v.  Richardson,  1  Wils.  16.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man." 
D.  3.  R.  V.  London,  (J.),  Burr.  1456.  R.  v.  Tod,  1  Stra.  530.  In  re  Gateshead 
(J.),  6  A.  &  E.  550,t  n.  («).     See  tit.  "Courts  Inferior,"  (To  proceed,  &c.) 

(i)  Ante,  p.  17.  R.  v.  North  Riding  (J.),  2  B.  &  C.  286,  290.f  R.  v.  Sillefant, 
5  N.  &  M.  643.f  R.  v.  Lord  Godolphin,  8  A.  &  E.  338.f  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  488.  But 
see  Stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  App.,  and  as  to  Ireland,  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s. 
8,  which  indemnity  for  any  thing  properly  does  in  the  execution  of  a  mandamus  ; 
the  Court  will,  therefore,  more  readily  grant  the  writ  in  doubtful  cases. 

{j)  In  re  Gateshead  (J.),  6  A.  &  E.  550,f  n. 

{k)  Ante,  p.  12.     R.  v.  Ellis,  2  D.,  N.  S.  361.     See  ante,  p.  239,  ri.  (e). 

{I)  Ante,  p.  18—27.  R.  v.  Dyer,  2  A.  &  E.  613.f  S.  C.  4  X.  &  M.  DoO.f  R.  v. 
Halls,  3  A.  &  E.  494.f  R.  v.  Mirehousc,  2  A.  &  E.  637.  S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  394.f  R. 
V.  Buckinghamsh.  (J.),  2  D.  &  R.  689.t  S.  C.  5  B.  &  C.  485,1  S.  P.  R.  t.  Buck- 
inghamsh.  (J.),  3  N.  &  M.  68.f  See  tits.  "Distress,"  "  Execution,"  "Poor"  (Rate 
Defaulters). 

(to)  Ante,  p.  17.  R.  v.  Hants.  (J.),  1  B.  &  Ad.  656,f  but  see  now  stats.  6  &  7 
Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  8  (I.),  App.  See  tit.  "  Poor  "  (Rate 
Defaulter). 

(«)  R.  T.  Drake,  6  M.  &  S.  118.  R.  y.  Broderip,  5  B.  &  C.  239.t  S.  C.  V  D.  & 
R.  861-1  R.  V.  Mirehouse,  2  A.  &  E.  637.t  S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  394.f  R.  v.  Bucking- 
hamsh. (J.),  2  D.  &  R.  689.t  S.  C.  1  B.  &  C.  485.f  R.  v.  Sillifant,  5  N.  &  M.  641.t 
R.  V.  Hughes,  3  A.  &  E.  425.t  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  94.t  R.  v.  Godolphin,  8  A.  &  E. 
338.t     S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  488  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.) 

(o)  R.  T.  Newcombe,  4  T.  R.  368  ;  but  see  now  stats.  1  W.  4,  c.  21 ;  6  &  7  Vict. 
c.  67,  s.  3,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  8  (I.),  App.  R.  v.  Paynter,  7  Q.  B.  266.f  S. 
C.  14L.  J.,  N.  S.  179,  Q.  B. 


QUARTER     SESSIONS.  291 

mittcd  for  want  of  recognizances,  and  at  the  sessions  he  did  not  take  the 
proper  steps  for  entering  his  appeal,  and  was  discharged  by  such  Court. 
The  Court  of  13.  R.  refused  to  grant  a  mandamus  to  command  the  convict- 
ing justices  to  commit  him  in  execution  of  the  conviction,  it  being  doubt- 
ful whether  they  had  any  further  jurisdiction,  as  such  a  course  might 
subject  the  justices  to  an  action. (^))  So  the  Court  of  B.  11.  will  not  call 
upon  magistrates  to  i.-sue  a  distress  warrant,  unless  the  case  be  perfectly 
clear,  and  there  be  reason  to  suppose  *that  the  magistrates  act  from  r^^oii  i 
caprice  or  bias  in  withholding  the  warrant;  notwithstanding  it  is 
bound  to  see  that  the  magistrates  are  acting  bona  fide  in  the  discharge  of 
their  duty  by  refusing  the  warrant,  but  if  they  are  so  acting,  a  very  strong 
case  must  be  made  out  to  induce  the  Court  to  call  upon  them  to  issue  a 
warrant  which  may  subject  them  to  an  action,  against  which  there  is  no 
indemnity. ((/)  The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  also  refuse  to  interfere,  in  cases 
where  the  act  which  the  magistrates  are  called  upon  to  do,  may,  in  itself, 
be  harmless,  if  the  subsequent  proceedings  may  reasonably  subject  them 
to  an  action.  Thus,  although  no  action  will  lie  against  justices  for  making 
an  order  for  the  payment  of  money,  &c.,  yet  if  the  making  it  may  place 
them  in  the  predicament,  that  in  case  of  disobedience  they  must  either  see 
their  authority  disregarded  with  impunity,  or  take  the  next  step,  that  of 
issuing  a  distress  warrant,  which  will  bring  them  within  the  peril  of  an 
action,  the  Court  will  refuse  the  writ  to  command  them  to  make  such  an 
order,  (r)  Nor  in  such  cases  will  the  Court  grant  the  writ,  even  though 
the  prosecutor  have  no  other  means  of  obtaining  relief.(s)  But  where  a 
clear  case  is  made  out,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  always  refused  to  and  will 
not  now  sanction  magistrates  in  abstaining  from  the  performance  of  an 
official  duty,  either  on  grounds  not  sufficient  in  reason,  or  from  i-eluctance 
to  incur  any  proper  responsibility.  (^) 

Previously  to  the  passing  of  the  recent  acts  of  Parliament,  namely,  6 
&  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3  (E),  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  8  (I),  it  was,  in 
cases  of  difficulty,  usual  and  prudent  to  request  the  magistrates  to  act 
upon  a  sufficient  indemnity,  actually  tendered,  after  which  the  Court 
usually  granted  the  writ.  But  where  a  prosecutor,  having  previously  to 
a  motion  for  a  rule  for  a  mandamus,  merely  proposed  to  call  a  meeting, 
for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  an  indemity  for  the  magistrates,  without 
actually  offering  a  sufficient  indemnity,  the  rule  was  discharged  with 

(p)  Ante,  p.  17.  R.  Y.  Twjford,  G  N.  &  M.  SSG.f  S.  C.  5  A.  &  E.  430-1  See 
tits.  "Conviction,"  "Poor"  (Rate  Defaulters). 

[q)  Ante,  p.  17.  R.  v.  Dyer,  4  N.  &  M.  550.1  S.  C.  2  A.  &  E.  G13.f.  R.  v. 
Buckingliamsli.  (J.),  3N.  &  M.  G8,f  and  see  S.  C.  (atR.  v.  Morgan),  2  A.  &  E.  618,t 
n.  (a)  ;  also  R.  v.  Buckingliamsli.  (J.).  1  B  &  C.  485.f  S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  GSO.f  R. 
v.  Trecothick,  2  A.  &  E.  405  ;f  3  A.  &  E.  499,f  supra.  But  see  stats.  6  &  7  Vict, 
c.  67,  s.  3;  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  8  (I.),  App.  See  tit.  "Rate,"  and  p.  239, 
n.  (e). 

(r)  Ante,  p.  17,  240,  n.  (i).     R.  v.  Silllfant,  6  N.  &  M.  G42,t  n.  (ff). 

ants.  (J.),  1  B. 
C.  J.,  supra. 
&  E.  388.t 


292  T  A  r  P  I  N  G  '  S     MANDAMUS. 

costs. (it)  If,  however,  there  was  no  doubt  in  the  case,  the  Court  usually 
granted  the  writ,  although  no  indemnity  had  been  offered  to  the  justi- 
ces.(i-)  Tlius  where  in  answer  to  an  application  for  a  mandamus 
against  magistrates  to  command  them  to  issue  distress  warrants  to  levy  a 
poor  rate,  it  was  suggested  that  the  warrants  would  have  to  be  executed 
r*oioi  'within  Hampton  Court  Palace,  that  the  oflfieers  of  the  '^'Crown 
^  ~  "  claimed  that  the  property  was  exempt  from  the  operation  of  such 
warrants,  and  threatened  proceedings  if  they  were  executed ;  the  Court 
nevertheless  granted  the  writ,  and  refused  to  call  upon  the  applicant 
parish  to  give  the  magistrates  an  indemnity  against  the  consequences  of 
any  proceedings  which  might  be  taken,  because  the  order  of  the  magis- 
trates would  be  simply  to  levy  on  the  goods  and  chattels  of  the  persons 
named  in  the  writ.(ip) 

At  this  day  the  Court  of  B.  R.  v,'ill  not  issue  a  mandamus  to  justices 
in  a  doubtful  case,  merely  in  order  that  they  may  make  a  return,  and  be 
protected  by  stat.  G  &  7  Vict.  c.  G7,  s.  3,  if  a  peremptory  mandamus 
should  issue  and  be  obeyed.  But  should  such  a  writ  be  issued  to  them, 
they  ought  not,  in  order  to  gain  the  protection  of  the  statute,  to  make  a 
return,  but  should  obey  the  writ.(x) 

The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  order  magistrates  to  do  that  which  may 
reasonably  occasion  them  costs,  for  which  they  have  no  means  of  reim- 
bursing themselves.  (,y) 

The  Court  of  B.  R.  has  refused  a  mandamus  to  command  the  chairman 
of  a  Quarter  Ses.sions  to  issue  process  for  the  apprehension  of  two  persons 
against  whom  a  bill  of  indictment  had  been  found  a  year  previously,  upon 
the  ground  that  an  application  for  such  process  had  been  rejected  at  ses- 
sions, (.i) 

.     Application. — Although  there  may  have  been  more  than  two 

magistrates  at  petty  sessions,  all  of  whom  took  part  in  a  decision,  it  is  not 
necessary  that  upon  an  application  for  a  mandamus,  all  who  were  present 
and  took  part  in  such  decision,  shall  be  included  in  the  rule ;  but  if  the 
Court  sees  that  any  two  have  been  selected,  or  that  any  of  the  justices  so 
acting,  have  been  omitted  for  any  improper  purpose,  it  will  require  all  to 
be  joined. (a) 

.     Rule,  Service. — Service  of  a  rule  nisi  for  a  mandamus  against 

(u)  R.  V.  Somersetsh.  (J.),  4  X.  &  M.  394.f  S.  C.  2  A.  &  E.  G3l.f  But  see  the 
indemnity  conferred  by  stat.  6  &  7  Yict.  c.  G7,  s.  3,  and  9  &  10  Viet.  c.  113,  s.  8 
(I.),  App. 

(«)  R.  V.  Marriott,  12  A.  &  E.  1l9.f  In  R.  v.  Ellis,  2  D.,  N.  S.  3G1,  the  justice 
was  trustee  of  the  propertv,  upon  which  it  was  sought  to  enforce  the  warrant. 
R.  V.  Middx.  (J.),  12  L.  J.,  X.  S.  36,  M.  C.  See  ante,  tit.  "Poor'  (Rate  Default- 
ers.) 

(w)  R.  V.  Middx.  (J.),  2  D.,  X.  S.  385. 

(r)  R.  V.  Dartmouth  (Earl),  5  Q.  B.  878.f  S.  C.  1  D.  &  M.  12G.  See  as  to  Ire- 
land, stat.  0  &  10  Yict.  c.  113,  s.  8,  App. 

(?/)  Ante,  p.  17.     Ex  parte  Carlton  High  Dale,  4  X.  &  M.  313. 

(2)  R.  V.  Russell,  1  D.,  X.  S.  544;  6  Jur.  221.     See  tit.  "Prisoner." 

(a)  Ante,  p.  228,  n.  (z).  R.  v.  Ellis,  2  D.,  X.  S.  361 ;  4  A.  &  E.  354.1  R.  v, 
Wilts.  (J.).  8  D.  717,  722.     S.  C.  4  Jur.  460.     See  post,  tit.  "Application." 


RAILWAY. 


293 


a  determination  of  the  petty  sessions,  need  not  Ijc  served  upon  the  clerk 
of  the  peace;  it  will  be  sufficient  if  it  be  served  on  the  justices  whose 
decision  is  complained  against,  and  also  upon  the  high  constable  of  the 
hundred ;  which  service  is  iu  conformity  with  the  practice  of  the  Crown 
Office.(i) 

Queen.]     See  titles  Croicn;  Customs  (^Commissioners ;)  Excise  (Com- 
missioners;)  Treasury  J  Lords. 


♦Railway.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows 


[^243] 


Railway. 

Duties,  &c.  - 
Rule  - 
Returns 


243 
244 
244 


Railway. 

Compensation 
Goods,  &c.  - 
Appeal 


244 
244 
245 


.]  Duties,  etc. — The  writ  of  mandamus  lies  to  command  a  rail- 
way company  to  set  out  and  define  the  line  of  their  railway,  and  to  proceed 
to  purchase  the  lands  necessary  to  the  making  and  completion  of  the  same 
pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  their  acts.(c)  Thus  the  Court  has  made 
absolute  a  rule  for  a  mandamus  to  command  a  railway  company  to  pro- 
ceed according  to  the  terms  of  the  act  of  Parliament,  obtained  by  them  to 
set  out  and  complete  their  line  from  A.  to  B.,  although  they  had  executed 
part,  and  the  time  had  not  arrived  within  which  they  were  to  execute  the 
remainder,  and  their  funds  were  inadequate  for  the  purpose,  the  Court 
being  of  opinion  that  they  had  no  bona  fide  intention  to  complete  the 
whole  work.(f/).  The  writ  must,  however,  be  applied  for  within  a  reason- 
able time.(e)  It  has  also  been  held  that  such  a  writ  does  not  lie  to  com- 
mand a  company  to  maintain  the  railway  when  constructed.  (/) 

But  where  a  railway  made  under  the  authority  of  an  act  of  Parliament, 
by  which  the  proprietors  were  incorporated,  and  by  which  it  was  provided, 
that  the  public  should  have  the  beneficial  enjoyment  of  the  same;  was 
afterwards  taken  up  by  the  company,  it  was  held  that  a  mandamus  might 
issue  to  command  the  company  to  reinstate,  and  lay  down  again  the  rail- 
way ;((/)  although  they  were  liable  to  an  indictment  for  not  so  doing;  for 


(h)  R.  V.  Tucker,  ry  D.  &  R. 434.1  S'.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  545,  546.f  See  post,  tit.  "Rule" 
(Service),  and  ante,  p.  234.     As  to  costs  of  unsuccessful  application,  p.  234. 

(c)  R.  V.  Eastern  Counties  Raihvaj-,  10  A.  &  E.  531.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48,  where 
see  a  form  of  writ.  S.  C.  1  Rail.  Gas.  509  ;  2  Rail.  Gas.  260.  S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
303,  Q.  B.  This  appears  to  be  the  first  mandamus  as  to  railway  matters.  R.  v. 
Gamble,  11  A.  &  E.  I2.f  S.  G.  3  P.  &  D.  123.  See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament," 
"  Company,"  "  Inclosure." 

(d)  R.  V.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  2  P.  &  D.  648.  S.  G.  10  A.  &  E.  531.f 
S.  0.  1  Rail.  Gas.  509  ;  but  see  tit.  "Application." 

(e)  R.  V.  Birmingham  Railway,  &c.,  1  G.  &  D.  335.  S.  G.  1  Q.  B.  4"  f  See  post, 
tit.  "Application"  (when  to  be  made.) 

(/)  10  A.  &  E.  543.1    S.  G.  4  P.  &  D.  48.    R.  v.  Severn  Railway,  2  B.  &  A.  646.t 

Iff)  R.  V.  Severn  Railway,  2  B.  &  A.  646. f     R.  y.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10 

A.  &  E.  543.t     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.     R.  v.  Gamble,  11  A.  &  E.  72.1     S.  G.  3  P.  & 

D.  123.     R.  V.  Pagham  Sewers,  2  M.  &  R.  4T1.     See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament," 

"  Inclosure." 


294  tapping's    mandamus. 

such  a  proceeding  merely  punisbes  for  past  defaults,  and  is  not,  therefore, 
an  cfl&cacious  remedy. (/t) 

The  writ  has  also  been  often  granted  to  command  a  railway  company 
to  increase  the  height  of  a  bridge  erected  by  them  over  a  public  carriage 
road,  according  to  the  provisions  of  their  act  of  Parliament. (/) 

So  the  writ  lies  to  command  such  a  company  to  execute  and  complete, 
*certain  works,  railways,  roads,  bridges,  drains,  &c.,  which  the 
L  "  -■  company  has  undertaken  to  execute  and  complete  by  virtue  of  the 
powers  entrusted  to  them  by  act  of  Parliament  ;(7)  or  to  command  the 
restoration  of  a  turnpike  road,  which  has  been,  by  a  railway  company 
carried  over  their  railway,  to  its  proper  width,  and  also  to  excavate  and 
widen  roads  crossed  by  a  railway. (A-) 

.     Rule. — The  rule  for  a  writ  for  any  of  the  before-mentioned 

purposes,  will  be  discharged  if  there  have  not  been  a  demand  made  to, 
and  a  refusal  by  the  company  both  before  and  after  the  works  were  com- 
pleted, to  execute,  &c.  the  necessary  works,  and  comply  with  their  act  of 
Parliament. (?) 

.     Returns. — Where  a  railway  or  other  company  has  by  its  act  of 

incorporation,  &c.,  stipulated  with  the  public  to  do  a  certain  act,  it  is  not 
a  good  return  that  such  act  cannot  be  executed  by  the  company,  owing  to 
the  want  of  funds,  or,  that  funds  cannot  be  raised  without  a  new  act, 
&c.(m)  Nor  is  it  a  good  return,  that  the  approaches  of  a  bridge,  though 
of  a  less  width,  are  as  convenient  to  the  public,  as  they  could  be  made  in 
execution  of  the  powers  of  the  act,  and  as  convenient  to  the  public  as  the 
original  road  had  been ;  or  that  the  company  could  not  widen  the  ap- 
proaches, without  taking  or  purchasing  more  land,  that  their  compulsory 
powers  of  purchasing  under  the  act  had  expired,  before  they  had  been 

{h)  Ante,  p.  24.  R.  T.Birmingham  Canal,  W.  Blac.  708,  n.  (6);  2  B.  &  A.  G46,f 
supra.  "But  it  is  the  general  opinion  that  R.  v.  Severn  Railway,  (supra,  n.  (g)  ), 
went  to  an  extreme  length  as  to  this  point."    3  P.  &  D.  123,  per  Ld.  Denman,  C.  J. 

{i)  R.  y.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  2  G.  &  D.  1  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  569.f  S.  C.  11  L.  J., 
N.  S.  178,  Q.  B.  But  see  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  4  Jur.  318.  See  tits. 
"  Highway,"  '•  Inclosure." 

O')  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Brecknock  Canal,  3  A.  &  E.  2l7.t  R.  v.  Bristol  Railway 
3  G.  &  D.  384.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  162  ;t  4  P.  &  D.  48.  S.  C.  10  A.  &  E.  531,t  supra. 
See  Blackraore  v.  Glamorgansh.  Canal,  1  M.  &  K.  154.  R.  v.  Severn,  &c.,  Com- 
pany, 2  B.  &  Aid.  646.  R.  v.  Cumberworth,  1  K  &P.  107.f  S.  C.  4  A.  &  E.  731.t 
See  2  P.  &  D.  648.  R.  v.  York  Railway,  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  277,  Q.  B.  where  see  form 
of  writ.  R.  V.  Norwich  Railway,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  24,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  3  D.  &  L.  385.  See 
tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  '•  Ilighwav." 

{k)  R.  T.  Birmingham  Railway,  1  G.  &  D.  324.  S.  C.  2  Q.B.  47,f  where  see  form 
of  writ  and  pleadings.  R.  v.  Manchester  Railway,  1  G.  &  D.  338.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B. 
528,1  and  3  G.  &  D.  269,  in  error,  where  see  form  of  writ  and  pleadings.  R.  v. 
Bristol  Railway,  3  G.  &  D.  384.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  162. f  S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  106,  Q. 
B.     See  tits.  "  Highway,"  "  Inclosure." 

{I)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Bristol  Railway.  3  G.  &  D.  384.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  162.1 
R.  V.  Brecknock  Canal  3  A.  &  E.  219. f  S.  C.'l2  L.  J.,  N.  S.  106,  Q.  B.  Sec  ante, 
p.  28  ;  see  post,  tit  "Application,"  (Demand  and  Refusal.) 

(;n)  Ante,  p.  109,  n.  {t);  10  A.  k  E.  531.t  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48,  supra,  where  see 
form  of  such  return.  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  2  P.  &  D.  655,  and  cases 
there  cited.  See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Company,"  Courts  Inferior"  (Holding 
Courts.) 


RECORDER.  295 

called  upon  to  widen,  and  that  tliey  had  not  then,  uor  have  since  had  the 
power  to  take  or  purchase  land  for  such  purpose.  (?i) 

.]      Compenscdlon.     See  title  Comjienmtion  (^Company). 

.]     Goods. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  a  railway  company 

to  convey  goods  along  their  line,  if  there  be  no  clause  in  their  act  of  in- 
corporation, requiring  them  to  carry  all  goods  offered  for  conveyance, 
although  they  may  have  agreed  with  certain  persons  to  carry  their  goods 
to  the  exclusion  of  all  others. (o) 

* .]     Appeal. — The  writ  lies  to  command  justices  to  hear  p^nic-i 

and  determine  an  appeal,  under  a  railway  act,  over  which  they  L 
have  jurisdiction. (p) 

Reading.]  Steicard  of;  Restoration. — The  writ  lies  to  restore  the 
Steward  of  Reading  to  his  office,  it  appearing  to  have  profits,  &c.,  annexed 
to  it,  and  also  to  be  an  office  pro  bono  publico,  (g') 

Receiver  op  Bedford  Level.]     See  tit.  Bedford  Level. 

Recorder.]     The  writ  lies  for  the  office  of  recorder. (r) 
This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


Recorder. 

Recorder. 

Election 

_ 

-  245 

Returns 

-  246 

Application 

_ 

-  245 

Restoration 

-  246 

Rule 

_ 

-  245 

Returns 

-  247 

Returns 

_ 

-  245 

Deputy  Recorder. 

Admission 

1          WloM'lr.,, 

Tl,n  11 

-246 

Swearing  in 
A  pmniiinnrl    n.  iTninif^ina 

-  247 
nnrnnration. 

to  put  the  corporate  seal  to  a  certificate  of  the  election  of  a  recorder,  in 
order  that  such  recorder  may  obtain  the  approval  of  the  Crown. (.s)  The 
writ  will  be  granted  for  this  purpose,  notwithstanding  the  election  of  such 
recorder  may  have  been  contested. 

.]     Applkation. — The  rule  for  such  a  mandamus  will  be  granted 

on  affidavits  that  the  applicant  had  the  majority  of  legal  votes  at  the  elec- 

{n)  R.  v.  Birmingham  Railway,  1  G.  &  D.  324.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  47-1  S.  C.  3  Q.  B. 
528,t  and  3  G.  &  D.  269,  in  error.     See  post,  tit.  "  Return." 

(o)  Ex  parte  Robins,  7  D.  556.  S.  C.  1  W.  W.  &  H.  578  ;  3  Jur.  193.  R.  v. 
Severn  Railway,  2  B.  &  A.  646.f     See  tit.  "  Contract,"  and  ante,  p.  27,  28. 

[p)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Worcester  (J.),  7  D.  789.  See  tits.  "Appeal,"  "  Quarter 
Sessions"  (Appeal). 

{q)  Blagrave  t.  Reading  (Mayor),  2  Sid.  6,  49,  72,  and  see  Thompson's  case,  4 
Jac,  there  cited.  It  was  a  writ  of  restitution  in  principal  case.  See  also  1  Sid. 
461,  and  tits.  "  Steward,"  "  Office." 

(;•)  2  Roll.  Abr.  456, 1.  30.  R.  v.  Wells,  Burr.  1999  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.) ; 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (C.)     See  tit.  "  Office,"  ante,  174,  n.  {iv),  [%). 

(s)  R.  T.  York  (Mayor),  4  T.  R.  699.  S.  C.  5  T.  R.  66,  where  see  a  form  of  writ ; 
and  see  6  East,  360,  n.  [d).  R.  v.  Colchester  (Mayor),  6  East,  360.  See  R.  v.  Ox- 
ford (Mayor),  6  A.  &  E.  353,f  per  Coleridge,  J.  R.  v.  Colchester  (Mayor),  2  T.  R. 
259.  R.  T.  Cambridge  (U.),  1  W.  Blac.  551.  S.  C.  Burr.  1647.  See  tits.  "Certi- 
ficate," "College"  (Seal),  "Corporation  Municipal"  (Seal),  "Hospital"  (Seal), 
"Seal." 


296  tapping's    mandamus. 

tion,  notwithstanding  it  may  be  stated,  that  another  candidate  had  the 
majority  at  the  election,  and  that  the  corporation  had  already  certified  his 
election,  the  office  not  being  in  such  case  do  facto  full.(/) 

.]     liuh. — The  rule  for  a  writ  for  this  purpose,  is,  like  that  to 

swear  in  a  corporator,  a  matter  of  course,  and  absolute  in  the  fii-st 
instance. («) 

r*OJ.ftl      '-J     li'^turns. — To  such  a  mandamus,  a  return   "that  the 

*-  ^  corporation  *werc  not  duly  assembled  to  proceed  to  the  election  of 
a  recorder,"  has  been  held  to  be  bad,  as  a  negative  pregnant. (v)  So, 
where  a  writ,  after  a  statement  of  all  the  proceedings  of  the  election,  con- 
cluded thus,  "  by  reason  thereof  A,  was  elected,"  it  was  held,  that  to 
return  that  "  he  was  not  elected,"  was  bad,  and  that  the  defendant  should 
have  traversed  one  of  the  material  facts  alleged. (?/;) 

.]     Admission. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  an  admission  of 

one  duly  entitled  to  the  office  of  recorder.  If,  however,  there  be  one  dc 
facto  not  colourably  elected,  the  applicant  must  adopt  his  remedy  by  quo 
warranto,  by  which  the  title  to  the  office  can  be  tried  as  effectually  as  by 
mandamus,  and  he  must  so  proceed,  notwithstanding  the  rival  candidate 
may  claim  under  the  same  election ;  for  the  consequence  of  granting  a 
rule  for  a  mandamus  in  such  a  case  would  be,  that  a  second  person  would 
be  admitted  to  an  office  already  filled  by  another,  both  claiming  to  have 
been  duly  elected,  (as) 

.]     Returns. — A  return  to  such  a  writ,  that  "  the  defendants  did 

not  know  that  the  prosecutor  had  been  elected  a  recorder,"  has  been  held 
to  be  insufficient,  (y) 

.]     Restoration. — The  writ  also  lies  to  restore  to  the  office  of 

recorder,  one  who  has  been  improperly  removed  therefrom, (2)  if  he  have 
a  freehold  in  his  office :  such  an  officer  is  usually  appointed  by  patent, 

{t)  4  T.  R.  699,  supra,  n.  (s).  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  6  A.  &  E.  353.t  See  stat. 
6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  s.  5,  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12  (I.)  ;  9  &  10 
Vict.  c.  113  (I.)     See  tit.  "Office"  (Election,  Application),  and  ante.  p.  26,  27. 

(m)  4  T.  R.  699,  700,  and  6  East,  360,  supra,  n.  (.?),  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App. 
See  tit.  "Office"  (Election  Rule),  and  post,  tit.  "Rule." 

(y)  R.  T.  York  (Major),  5  T.  R.  66.  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Election  Returns),  and 
post,  tit.  "  Return,"  as  to  the  present  effect  of  a  negative  pregnant. 

{%•)  5  T.  R.  66,  supra,  n.  {v).     See  post,  tit.  "Return"  (Certainty). 

(x)  Ante,  p.  12,  26,  27.  R.  t.  Colchester  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  259.'  See  R.  r.  Bed- 
ford Level  (Corp.),  6  East,  360.  R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  4  T.  R.  699.  See  R.  v.  Bar- 
ker, Burr.  1265.  R.  v.  Blooer,  Burr.  1045.  Bossiny's  case,  Str.  1003.  R.  v.  Bankes, 
Burr.  1453.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  445,  452,  where  a  mandamus  was  granted,  though 
there  was  a  mayor  de  facto.  See  also  Case  of  Aberystwith,  Stra.  1157,  and  R.  v. 
Cambridge  (Mayor),  Burr.  2008;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.  2.  See  tits.  "Office," 
'■  Mayor'  (Election),  (Election,  Admission). 

{y)  Bassett  v.  Barnstable  (Mayor),  1  Sid.  286.  For  other  returns,  see  tit.  "  Office" 
(Admission,  Returns). 

(z)  Ante,  p.  12.  Bassett  v.  Barnstable  (Mayor),  1  Sid.  286  ;  6  Rep.  52.  Awdley's 
case,  Noy.  78  ;  Andr.  181 ;  Trem.  PL  Cor.  541,  -where  see  form  of  writ.  R.  v.  Corye, 
Sty.  86.  This  was  a  writ  of  restitution  (ante.  p.  3).  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  Show. 
69.  R.T.  Wells  (Corp.),  Burr.  1999,  2007.  R.  v.  Holt,  3  Keb.  667,  citing  Blagrave's 
case.  Prlns'  case,  1  Keb.  520,  541.  AVhitacre's  case,  cited  in  1  Barn.  295.  The 
Protector  v.  Craford,  Sty.  457.  The  Protector  v.  Colchester  (Town),  Sty.  446, 452. 
Ld.  Hawley's  case,  1  Vent.  143.     S.  C.  2  Keb.  770,  796.     S.  C.  2  Salk.  430.    Pepis' 


RECORDER. 


297 


quamdiu  sc  bene  gesscrit,(r/)  and  is  a  knovrn  officer,  whose  duty  it  is  to 
adminiKter  justice  in  relation  to  the  public.  (/^)  But  if  a  recorder  be  liable 
to  be  removed  "  at  2jleasure,"  which  is  sometimes  the  case,  then  a  mandamus 
to  restore  will  not  be  granted, (c)  but  such  power  to  remove  "  ad  litum" 
*must  be  returned. (tZ)  Where  there  is  a  power  to  remove  "'^^^r*o47-| 
litum,"  the  choice  of  another  person  to  be  recorder,  is  tantamount  ^  " 
to  a  declaration  of  removal ;  so  that,  in  such  a  case,  either  an  amotion,  or 
the  election  of  another,  may  be  returned,  as  in  the  case  of  a  tenancy  at 
will,  where  the  landlord  may  determine  his  will  by  express  words,  or  by 
any  act  which  is  inconsistent  with  his  estate. (e) 

.]     Returns. — A  return  that  the  defendants  did  not  know  that 

the  prosecutor  was  elected,  is  bad.(/) 

As  a  recorder  is  bound  to  attend  and  assist  at  the  sessions,  in  order  that 
he  may  direct  the  corporation  in  the  proceedings  of  justice,  and  his  office 
is  a  public  one,  relating  to  justice,  so  non-attendance  is  a  cause  both  of 
forfeiture  and  of  return  ;{(])  but  such  a  return  should  state,  that  Courts 
have  been  held  of  which  he  had  due  notice,  and  that  he  wilfully  absented 
himsclf.(/() 

.]     Dcjmti/,  Sicearinrj  m.— The  writ  lies  also   to  command  the 

swearing  in  of  a  deputy  recorder,  legally  and  duly  appointed. (t) 

case,  1  Vent.  342;  Sir  T.  Jones,  51.     Digbtoa  v.  Stratford,  &c.,  2  Keb.  641.     See 
tit.  "Office"  (Restoration), 
(fl)  Ante,  p.  175,  n.  {I). 

\b)  Eastwick  v.  London  (City),  Sty.  42.  Holt's  case,  Freem.  441.  See  Burr. 
1999,  2005,  supra.     See  tits.  "  Constable,"  "  Office"  (Public),  and  ante,  p.  12. 

(c)  Ante,  p.  Ill,  n.  (n).  Serjt.  Whitacre's  case,  11  Mod.  Ql  (cited  also  in  R.  t. 
Carlisle  (Mayor),  11  Mod.  378).  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1233,  1283.  S.  C.  Holt,  443.  S.  C. 
2  Salk.  434.  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Mayor),  11  Mod.  403.  S.  C.  Stra.  G74.  See  tit. 
"Office"  (Restoration). 

{(1)  See  ante,  p.  17G.  Pepis'  case,  1  Vent.  342.  Blagrave's  case,  2  Sid.  49,  72. 
The  autliority  of  Blagrave's  case  has  been  attempted  to  be  impugned,  but  unsuc- 
cessfully, Hurst's  case,  1  Keb.  388;  1  Vent.  343;  2  Sid.  49,  72.  See  tit.  "Office" 
(Freehold),  and  post,  tit.  "Return." 

(f)  R.  V.  Canterbury  (Mayor),  11  Mod.  403.  S.  C.  Stra.  674.  R.  v.  Thame, 
Stra.  115.  R.  v.  Taunton  (Churchwardens),  Cowp.  413.  Pepis'  case,  1  Vent.  342. 
See  tit.  "Office"  (Freehold  Returns). 

So  rules  nisi  for  writs  of  mandamus  to  restore  to  a  recordcrship  have  been 
granted,  directed  to  the  commissioners  acting  under  the  Statute  of  Corporations. 
Prin's  case,  1  Keb.  520,  541.  In  such  cases  the  Return  usually  made  was  that 
"  they  (the  comniissioners)  adjudged  it  fitting,  expedient,  and  for  the  public  good 
that  iie  (the  person  deprived)  be  not  restored."  On  one  occasion,  when  such  a 
return  was  objected  to  on  several  grounds,  and  the  Court  was  divided  in  opinion 
as  to  the  "  Expositions  of  the  boundless  commissions  given  by  the  late  (this  case 
was  argued  T.  T.  15  Car.  2,  B.  R.)  irregular  powers  to  justices;"  it  conceived  that 
"  as  the  Parliament  was  then  sitting,  the  best  way  was  to  adjourn  the  giving  of 
judgment,  and  in  the  meantime  pray  advice  of  the  Lords  in  Parliament  as  to  the 
exposition  of  the  act,  and  not  to  give  any  opinion  on  it  during  their  sitting."  1 
Keb.  541. 

(/)  Ante,  p.  246,  n.  (?/).  Bassett  v.  Barnstable  (Mayor),  1  Sid.  28G.  For  other 
returns  see  the  Protector  v.  Colchester  City,  Sty.  447,  453,  and  tit.  "  Office." 

(<j)  Ante,  p.  198.  Serjeant  "Whitacre's  case,  11  Mod.  67.  R.v.  Ipswich  (Bailiffs), 
2  Salk.  434,  435,  citing  R.  v.  Wells  (Corp.),  Burr.  1999 ;  and  see  tit.  "  Office"  (Re- 
storation Returns),  and  post,  tit.  "Return." 

[h)  Bath  V.  Ld.  Hawley,  2  Keb.  770,  797,  P.  1655,  in  Barnardiston's  case.  Stiles, 
452. 

{i)  Ante,  p.  12.     R.  v.  St.  Alban's  (Mayor),  12  East,  559.     See  R.  v.  Roberts,  3 


298 


tapping's    isi  a  n  d  a  im  u  s. 


Kecords.]  Sec  titles  Accounts;  Boohs;  Records,  dv. ;  Company; 
Corporation  Municipal  (Insignia');  Courts  Inferior  (^Records) ;  Manor 
(^Leet  Records) ;  Peace  (^Clcrk  of ) ;  Quainter  Sessions  [Records') ;  Town 
Clerh  {Records);    Will  {Delivery). 

Register  of  Dean  and  Chapter.]     Sec  tit.  Dean  and  Chapter. 


[*248] 


^Registers  or  Middlesex.]  Registration. — The  writ  lies  to 
command  the  registers  of  JMicldlesex  to  register  the  memorial  of  a 
cleed,  duly  stamped  and  executed,  notwithstanding  the  body  thereof  be 
lithographed, (y)  and  not  written  in  the  ordinary  way. 


Registrar  OF  Livings.]     ^ee  titles  Insj^ection ;  Livings;  Parson. 

Registrar  of  Births,  &c.]  Birth. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  has  no 
power  to  issue  a  mandamus  to  the  registrar  of  births,  &c.,  under  stat.  6  & 
7  Wm.  4,  c.  86,  to  command  him  to  erase  or  alter  the  entry  of  a  BiriJi, 
notwithstanding  it  appear  that  the  child  was  not  only  supposititious,  but 
that  the  entry  had  been  made  for  fraudulent  purposes,  and  though  the  appli- 
cation be  made  by  a  party  having  a  pecuniary  interest  in  defeating  the 
alleged  fraud. (/r) 

.]  Marriage. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  superintendent  reg- 
istrar of  marriages  to  issue  his  certificate,  pursuant  to  stat.  6  &  7  Wm.  4,  c. 
85,  s.  7,  for  a  marriage  within  his  district,  but  not  out  of  it,  for  he  has 
no  jurisdiction. (?) 

Registrar.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


Registrar  (Deputy)  of  Archt 

isliop 

Registrar  of  Bishop's  Court  - 

-  249 

of  York     - 

- 

248 

Restoration    -         -         - 

-  249 

Admission 

- 

248 

(Deputy)  Admission 

-  249 

Registrar  of  Archdeacon 

- 

249 

Registrar  of  Consistory  Court 

-  249 

Admission     - 

- 

249 

Delivery  of  Records,  kc. 

-  249 

Return    - 

- 

249 

Registrar  of  Ecclesiastical  Court 

-  250 

Restoration    - 

- 

249 

Restoration   -        -        - 

-  250 

Registrar  of  Archbishop  of  York's  Court.]  Admission  of 
Deputy. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  commissary  of  the  Archbishop 
of  York's  Court,  to  admit  and  swear  the  deputy  of  the  principal  registrar 
of  such  Court,  notwithstanding  it  is  a  spiritual  office.  The  right  to  the 
office  of  registrar  is  to  be  determined  at  common  law,  and  not  in  the  Spiri- 


A.  &E.  TVG.  See  tits.-"  Deputy  Oflicer,"  "Marches,"  "  Office"  (Deputy),  "Regis- 
trar of  Archbishop  of  York's  Court." 

{/)  Ante,  p.  12,  27,  28.  R.  v.  Middlesex  (Registers),  7  Q.  B.  156.f  S.  C.  nom. 
In  re  Ivimev,  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  200,  Q.  B.     See  tit.  "  Act  of  Parliament." 

(/c)  Ex  parte  Stanford,  1  G.  &  D.  428.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  88G.f  S.  C.  9  D.  927,  nom. 
In  re  Registrar  of  Births,  &c.,  at  Brixton.  See  the  same  case  cited  in  R.  v.  West 
Riding  (J.),  5  Q.  B.  5.f     See  tits.  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Records),  "Records." 

{!)  Ante,  p.  12,  16.     Ex  parte  Brady,  8  D.  332.     See  tit.  "Act  of  Parliament." 


REGISTRAR.  299 

tual  Court,  tliougli  the  subject-matter  be  spiritual;  because  the  office  itself 
bein"  matter  oifreeJwW,  is,  for  that  reason,  of  temporal  cognizance.  The 
writ  will  not  be  granted  at  the  instance  of  the  deputy  himself,  he  being 
but  an  officer  at  will.(m) 

*E,EGISTRAR  OF  Arciideacon.]    Admitsswn. — The  writ  will  be  r*.-)49-| 
granted  to  command  an  admittance  to  the  office  of  registrar  of  an 
archdeacon,  (m) 

.  Return. — It  has  been  held  not  to  be  a  good  return  to  a  man- 
damus to  admit  a  registrar,  "  that  an  appeal  is  pending  as  to  the  admis- 
sion," and  "an  inhibition  from  the  delegates  to  do  nothing  to  prejudice 
the  right,"  &c.(o) 

.]     Restoration. — The  writ  lies  to  restore  to  the  office  of  registrar 

of  an  archdeacon. (jj) 

Registrar  of  Bishop's  Court.]  Restoration. — The  writ  will  be 
granted  to  restore  to  the  office  of  registrar  of  a  Bishop's  Court.  (2') 

.]     .     Dcputij,  Admission. — The  writ  of  mandamus  lies  to 

command  a  bishop  to  admit  one  duly  entitled  to  the  office  of  deputy  regis- 
trar of  his  diocese,  it  being  an  office  in  which  the  administration  of  jus- 
tice is  concerned.  Thus,  where  the  registrars  of  a  diocese  were  authorized 
by  their  patent  of  office,  (under  the  bishop's  hand  and  seal,)  to  appoint  a 
deputy,  to  be  approved  of  and  allowed  by  the  bishop,  who,  if  he  should 
not  approve  of  and  allow  the  deputy  named  and  proposed  to  him,  was 
empowered  to  nominate  another,  with  a  salary  payable  out  of  the  profits 
of  the  registrarship :  the  registrars  appointed  a  deputy,  subject  to  the 
approbation  and  consent  of  the  bishop,  who,  on  being  informed  of  it, 
answered,  that  "  for  good  and  sufficient  reasons  he  disapproved  of  the 
party  nominated,"  but  declined  to  specify  his  reasons ;  the  Court  refused 

(m)  R.  V.  Ward  (Dr.),  11.,  4  Geo.  2  ;  Str.  893  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  S. 
C.  Fitzg.  123,  194.  S.  U.  1  Barn.  252,  294,  380,  411  (tlie  writ  was  directed  to 
"  The  Commissary  of  the  province  of  York,"  Ford's  MS.  ;  1  East,  348  b.),  citing 
Keb.  G15,  where  it  is  said  to  have  been  expressly  decided  that  it  does  not  lie  to 
admit  a  register,  Fitzg.  194;  3  Bac.  Abr.  531.  S.  C.  R.  v.  Clapham,  1  Vent.  110. 
S.  C.  1  Lev.  306.  R.  v.  Roberts,  3  A.  &  E.  TJG.-f  See  White's  case,  6  Mod.  18,  per 
Holt,  C.  J.  R.  V.  Dr.  Bland,  7  Mod.  356,  citing  R.  v.  Dr.  Ward,  snpra.  See  8  East, 
216  ;  5  Bac.  Abr.  G.  198 ;  2  Roll.  Abr.  285.  Jones  v.  Llandati'  (Ep.),  4  Mod.  27,  8. 
Lee's  case,  Carth.  169.  See  tits.  "  Deputy  Officer,"  "  Marches,"  "  Office"  (Deputy), 
"  Proctor." 

(?/)  Ante,  p.  12,  178.  Lambert's  case,  Carth.  170.  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Hill,  1 
Show.  253,  and  cases  there  cited.  Trem.  536.  See  tits.  "Archdeacon,"  "Office" 
(Admission). 

(0)  R.  V.  Dr.  Harris,  1  W.  Blac.  430.  S.  C.  Burr.  1420.  R.  v.  Ward,  Stra.  893  ; 
Fitz.  123,  194, 195.  See  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep).,  1  T.  R.  403;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D. 
4.  See  tits.  "Churchwarden"  (Swearing  in,  Returns),  "  Inhilntion,"  "  Office"  (Ad- 
mission, Returns). 

(p)  Ante,  p.  12.  Ruding  v.  Newell,  Stra.  983  ;  Trem.  PL  Cor.  530,  where  see 
form  of  writ.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration). 

[q)  Ante,  p.  12,  177,  178.  Gloucester's  case  (Ep.),  Comb.  264.  It  was  not 
granted  until  after  some  hesitation.  See  Anon.,  12  Mod.  6G6,  per  Holt,  C.  J.  R. 
V.  Ward,  Stra.  893.  Ballard  v.  Gerrard,  12  Mod.  609 ;  Holt,  442.  See  tit.  "Office" 
(Restoration). 


300  tapping's    mandamus. 

a  rule  nisi  fur  a  inandamus  to  tlio  bishop  to  adiiiit  the  deputy,  the  bishop 
having  a  discretion  which  the  Court  couhl  not  force  him  to  exercise  in  a 
partieuhir  ■\vay.(r) 

ItEcnsTRAii  OF  Consistory  Court.]     Delivery  of  Jiolh,  rfr. — The 
writ  lies  to  command  the  registrar  of  a  Consistory  Court  to  deliver  over  to 
P^.-,rQ-|  him  *who  as  of  right  should  receive   them,  all  the  public  books, 
records,  and  entries  relating  to  such  oflicc.(s) 

Registrar  or  Ecclesiastical  Court.]  Restoration. — The  -writ 
also  lies  to  command  a  restoration  to  the  office  of  registrar  of  an  Ecclesi- 
astical Court. (/)  There  should,  however,  be  an  affidavit  that  the  officer 
has  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction. 

Registrar  op  Bedford  Level.]  Sec  title  Bedford  Level  (Rerjis- 
trar.) 

Registration.]      CompanTj. — See  title  Compani/  (^Registration.) 

Registration  of  Deed.]     See  title  Register  of  Middlesex. 

Regius  Professor.]  See  titles  College  [Master;)  School  (^dlaster,) 
(Teacher;)  Uitiversifj/  (^Regius  Professor.) 

Rehearing.]  See  titles  Courts  Inferior  (Rehearing;)  Quarter  Ses- 
sions (Rehearing.) 

Requests  Court.]  See  titles  Courts  Inferior  (Reriuests  Court;) 
London. 

R,ESIANT.]     See  titles  Burgess  (Admission  ;^  Manor  (Leet  Resiant.^ 

Returning  Officers.]  AjtjMintmcnt. — The  writ  lies  to  command 
overseers  of  townships  comprised  in  an  union,  to  meet  and  appoint  a 
returning  officer,  to  preside  at  the  election  of  guardians  of  a  parish 
union. (?() 

(r)  Ante,  p.  12—15.  See  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.  R.  v.  Ward,  Stra.  893.  S.  C. 
Fitzg.  123.  R.  V.  Gloucester  (Ep.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  158  ;t  but  see  R.  v.  Hill,  1  Show. 
253,  Avliere  Holt,  C.  J.,  says  that  the  writ  does'  not  lie  for  a  deputy  register,  his 
office  being  at  Avill.  See  tits.  "Deputy,"  "Discretion,"  "Lecturship"  (License), 
"Office"  (Admission),  "School"  (Master,  License). 

(s)  R.  V.  Wheeler,  Cas.  t.  temp.  Hard.  98;  Cunn.  155,  S.  C.  S(5e  tits.  "Ac- 
counts," "Books,"  "Company,|'  "Courts  Inferior"  (Records),  "Manor"  (Rolls), 
"Peace"  (Clerks  of),  "Records." 

(i)  Ante,  p.  12;  Garth.  170.  R.  v.  Ward,  Gilb.  193.  White's  case,  6  Mod.  18; 
but  Holt,  C.  J.,  said  it  was  against  his  will ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  ".Man."  (A.).  See 
Leigh's  case,  3  Mod.  335;  and  sec  R.  v.  Morpeth  (Bailiffs),  Stra.  59 ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"  Man."  C.     See  tits.  "  Ecclesiastical  Court,"  "  Office"f  (Restoration). 

(m)  R.  v.  Oldham  LTnion,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  110,  M.  C.,  where  see  form  of  writ.     See 


RIOTS.  301 

Revising  Baruister's  Court.]  Sec  titles  Burgess  Roll;  Courts 
Inferior  {Rcvhinu  Barrister ;)  Quarter  Sessions. 

Riots.]  Damages. — The  writ  lies  to  command  justices  to  appoint  a 
special  Petty  Sessions,  pursuant  to  stat.  7  &  8  Geo.  4,  c.  31,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  hearing  and  determining  a  claim  to  compensation  for  damage,  which 
had  been  suffered  by  rioters. (t')  But  in  order  to  entitle  a  party  to  require 
the  '''holding  of  such  a  sessions,  it  must  appear  by  affidavit,  that  j..,.,-, ^ .. -, 
within  seven  days  after  the  commission  of  the  offence,  he  went 
before  a  justice  of  the  peace,  &c.,  and  that  he  also  complied  with  all  the 
other  requisites  of  the  statute.  The  absence  of  such  an  affidavit  will 
determine  the  Court  not  to  grant  the  writ,  (if) 

The  writ  also  lies  to  command  the  Quarter  Sessions  to  hear  an  ap- 
peal against  the  decision  of  a  special  Petty  Session,  on  an  applica- 
tion for  compensation  under  stat.  o  Geo.  4,  c.  o.j,  for  damage  done  by 
rioters,  (.r) 

.]     Rate.—~T]iQ  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  justices  to  cause  a 

rate  to  be  make  and  levied  for  raising  and  paying  the  taxed  costs  of  de- 
fending actions  on  stat.  57  Geo.  3,  c.  19,  s.  38,  against  the  applicants  for 
the  recovery  of  certain  damages  found  to  have  been  sustained  by  the  plain- 
tiff's in  those  actions,  in  consequence  of  certain  tumultuous  assemblages 
of  persons  within  the  borough,  if  the  borough  be  not  within  a  hun- 
dred, because  the  relief  is  confined  solely  to  hundreds  alitor,  if  within  a 
hundred. (_y) 

.]      Compensation. — As    to    compensation    for   damage    done  by 

rioters.      See  titles  Compensation  [Rioters)  ;  Damages. 


Road.]      Sec  titles    Cemal;  Footwai/ ;    Iliglaray ;   Inelosure ;   Rail- 
%oay. 

Rugby  Charity,  Trustees  of.]     See  titles  CJiaritj ;   Institutions, 
Private ;   Trust. 


Russia  Company.]     See  titles  Company ;  Freincliise;  Freedom  (^Com- 
piavy,  Swearing  in.) 


tits.  "Constable"  (Appointment),  "  Gnardians  of  Poor''  (Election),  "Office,"  "Pa- 
rish" (Olliccrs,  Election). 

((')  K.  V.  Bateman,  4  B.  &  Ad.  G52.f  S.  C.  1  K  &  M.  TlS.f  See  tits.  "Courts  In- 
ferior" (Holding  Court),  "Manor"  (Leet),  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Petty  Sessions). 

(tv)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.     See  post,  tit.  "Application"  (Affidavits). 

(x)  R.  V.  Tuclvcr,  5  D.&  R.  434.f  See  tits.  "  Courts  Inferior"  (Appeal)  "Quarter 
Sessions"  (Appeal). 

{?/)  Ante,  p.  16.  R.  r.  King's  Lynn  (J.),  3  B.  &  C.  HT.f  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  778.f 
See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Costs,"  "Damages,"  "Money,"  and  post,  "Appli- 
cation." 


302  T  A  r  P  I  N  G  '  S     MANDAMUS. 

Sacrament.]  Administratiou. — The  writ  has  issnetl  to  command  the 
aclministration  of  the  Sacrament  of  our  Lord's  Supper. (:) 

As  to  return  of  not  taking  the  Sacrament  in  order  Qi)  to  f|ualify  for 
corporate  office. 

St.  Martyn-Le-Grand,  Court  of.]  See  titles  Attorney  [Restoration) ; 
Courts  Inferior  (^Saint  Mar tijn-h- Grand.) 

r^c,--,-,      -■'Salary.]    See  titles  iec^itresZmj  ;  Money;  Office  ( Fees,  &c.  ;) 
[*2o2] 

rarson. 

Sayings'  Bank.]  Arlitration. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  man- 
accrs,  directors,  or  trustees  of  a  savings'  bank,  to  name  and  appoint  an 
arbitrator  on  their  behalf,  to  arbitrate  in  pursuance  of  the  stat.  9  Geo.  4, 
c.  92,  s.  45,  as  to  matters  in  dispute  between  the  bank  managers  and  the 
depositers,(Z')  because  there  is  no  other  remedy;  for  it  has  been  held,  that 
where  money  belonging  to  the  depositers  in  a  savings'  bank  had  been 
embezzled,  or  lost  by  the  default  of  the  officers  of  the  bank,  the  remedy 
of  the  depositors  was  not  by  action  against  the  trustees  or  managers,  but 
by  mandamus  to  compel  them  to  appoint  an  arbitrator  under  stat.  9  Geo. 
4,  c.  92,  s.  45. (c)  But  where  by  a  rule  of  a  saving.s'  bank,  no  claim  for 
any  sum  of  money  could  be  made  after  more  than  seven  years  from  the 
death  of  a  depositor,  the  Court  discharged  a  rule  nisi  for  a  mandamus 
to  the  trustees  of  such  a  bank,  to  appoint  an  arbitrator  under  stat. 
9  Geo.  4,  c.  92,  s.  45,  to  decide  a  dispute  as  to  the  money,  the 
alleged  depositor  of  which  had  been  dead  more  than  seven  years ;  for 
the  Court  will  not  set  on  foot  an  inquiry  which  cannot  end  in  any  useful 
result. (r/) 

The  applicants  must  shew  themselves  to  be  depositors,  otherwise  the 

(z)  Cited  in  E,.  \.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  1G7.  But  it  is  said  by  Windbam,  J.,  tbat  this 
precedent  is  not  to  be  followed,  for  that  most  likely  the  writ  in  that  case  was,  like 
many  others,  issued  auctoritate  Parliamenti  on  petitions  presented  to  the  King  and 
Parliament  from  the  House  of  Lords,  which  was  then  distinct,  and  a  Court  of 
Judicature  : — in  such  cases  the  King  gave  present  answers  unica  voce,  without  an 
act  of  Parliament.  Ante,  p.  3,  n.  (/).  See  tits.  -Bishop,"  "Chrism,"  '•  Confirma- 
tion," "Consecration,"  '•  Yisitation." 

(a)  Clerk's  case,  2  Yent.  247.  R.  v.  Larwood,  4  Mod.  269.  R.  v.  Aldborough 
(Borough),  10  Mod.  100.  See  tits.  "Alderman"  (Restoration,  Oaths),  " Oaths," 
"Office"  (Restoration,  Return,  Oaths). 

(h)  See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "Arbitration,"  "Award."  R.  v.  Witham 
Savings'  Bank,  1  A.  &  E.  321,  325.t  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.416.t  R.  v.  Cheadle  Savings' 
Bank,  1  A.  &  E.  323,t  n.  {a).  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  418,t  n.  (a).  R.  v.  MildcnhaU 
Savings'  Bank,  6  A.  &  E.  952.t  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  278.  R.  v.  Northwich  Savings' 
Bank.  9  A.  &  E.  729.f  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  477.  But  see  stat.  4  &  5  Wm.  4,  c.  40, 
amending  stat.  10  Geo.  4,  c.  56,  as  to  Savings'  Banks. 

(c)  Ante,  p.  18—25.  R.  v.  Mildenhall  Savings'  Bank,  2  X.  &P.  278.  S.  C.  6  A. 
&  E.  952  :t  also  R.  v.  Witham  Savings'  Bank,  3  N.  &  M.  416.1  S.  C.  1  A.  &  E. 
321,t  and  R.  v.  Cheadle  Savings'  Bank,  3  X.  k  M.  418,t  n.  (a).  S.  C.  1  A.  &  E. 
323,t  n.  (a). 

{d)  Ante,  p.  15.  R.  v.  Xorthwich  Savings'  Bank,  1  P.  &  D.  477.  S.  C.  9  A.  &  E. 
729.f       See  tit.  post,  "  Application." 


scnoLARsnip.  303 

writ  will  be  refused. (c)  But  the  Court  of  B.  R.  bas  under  stat.  9  Geo. 
4,  c.  92,  s.  45,  granted  a  mandamus  to  command  a  savings'  bank  to  ap- 
point an  arbitrator  to  decide  between  sucb  bank  and  the  applicants,  in 
wbose  names  a  deposit  bas  been  made,  altbougb  sucb  deposit  bad  been 
witbdrawn  by  tbe  person  wbo  bad  made  it  for  tbe  applicants,  and  notwitb- 
standing  tbe  bank  rules  directed  tbat  a  duplicate  book  of  tbe  deposits 
sbould  be  delivered  by  tbe  bank,  and  be  an  autbority  for  paying  over  any 
sums  to  tbe  person  bringing  it  to  tbe  bank,  and  tbougb  sucb  duplicate  was 
delivered  up  to  tbe  bank  wben  tbe  deposit  was  witbdrawn. (/)  Tbe  writ 
will  not  bowevcr  be  granted  for  tbe  purpose  of  deciding  upon  tbe  claim  of 
persons  professing  to  apply  on  bebalf  of  a  body  of  depositors,  if  it  be  mat- 
ter of  dispute  among  tbe  depositers  tbemselves,  wbetber  or  not  tbe  appli- 
cants are  entitled  to  represent  tbe  body.(r/) 

*Sc avenger].     Tbe  writ  lies  for  tbe  office  of  scavenger  wben  r^ogg-i 
appointed   by  act    of    Parliament,   and    tbereby   made   a  public 
office.  (//) 

•]     Appointment,  Duties,  &c.'] — It  bas  been  beld,  tbat  tbe  writ 

lies  to  command  an  appointment  of  scavengers.  Tbe  report  of  tbe  case 
is  tbus,  '^  tbe  Court  was  moved  for  tbe  parisbioners  and  officers  of  tbe 
parisb  of  Clerkenwell,  to  make  scavengers,  tbat  are  elected  in  tbat  parisb, 
serve  tbe  office."  Rolle,  C.  J.,  answered,  "  It  is  marvel  tbat  the  city  of 
London  do  not  look  to  tbis,  for  they  bave  power  by  tbeir  bye-laws  to 
make  men  serve  sucb  offices.  Yet  take  a  mandamus  for  tbem  to  be 
brougbt  bitber  to  shew  cause  wby  tbey  will  not  execute  tbe  office."(i) 

.]     Admission,  Swearing  in. — Tbe  writ  lies  to  admit  a  scavenger 

to  bis  office,(7)  and  also  to  swear  bim  to  tbe  duties  of  bis  office. (A-) 

Scholarship.]  See  titles  College  (^Scliolarsliip;)  University  [Scho- 
lar.^ 

School.]     Tbis  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 

(e)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  Supra,  1  A.  &  E.  323,f  n.  (a).  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  418,f  n. 
{a} ;  9  A.  &  K.  729.f     S.  0.  1  P.  &  D.  477.     See  post,  tit.  "  Application." 

(/)  R.  V.  Clieadle  Savings'  Bank,  1  A.  &  E.  323,t  n.  (a).  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  418.1 
n.  (a).  wScc  supra,  n.  (c),  6  A.  &  E.  956-1  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  278,  and  1  A.  &  E. 
321.t     S.  C.  3  N.  &M.  416.t 

(ff)  See  ante,  p.  27,  28.  D.  v.  Witham  Savings'  Bank,  1  A.  &  E.  321.f  See  post, 
tit.  "  Application." 

(h)  See  tit.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "Churchwarden."  See  He's  case,  1  Vent.  143. 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.),  also  cited  in  the  Case  of  Parish  Issues,  Comb.  257. 
See  stats.  2  Wm.  &  M.,  st.  2,  c.  8,  3  Wm.  &  M.,  c.  12,  8  &  9  Wm.  3,  c.  37,  G  Geo.  ], 
c.  G,  18  Geo.  2.  c.  33,  ss.  2,  3. 

(i)  Anon.,  Mich.  1652;  Sty.  346,  cited  in  Patrick's  case,  Raj-m.  Ill,  nom.  The 
case  of  the  Inhabitants  of  Clerkenwell,  M.  1652. 

(J)  See  R.  V.  Barker,  Burr.  1267,  12G8,  per  Wilmot,  J., ;  also  R.  v.  Evans,  1 
Show.  282.  City  Works'  case,  2  Sid.  112.  R.  t.  Morpeth  (Bailiffs),  Stra.  59,  H.  4 
Geo.  1.     R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  181.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Admission). 

(k)  Hub.  270,  M.  1652,  cited  in  R.  v.  Patrick,  1  Keb.  834.  Sec  tit.  "  Office" 
(Swearing  in). 


S04  T  A  r  P  I  N  0  '  S     MANDAMUS. 


Sclioolmfister  .  -  -  -  253 

License  .  -  -  -  254 

Admission  -  -  -  -  254 

Restoration  -  -  -  -  254 

Teacher 254 

License  -  -  -  -  254 

Admission  -  -  .  -  254 


Under  Master  ....  254 
License  ....  254 

Restoration    ...         -  255 

Usher 255 

License  .         .         _         .  255 

Restoration    -         -         -         -  255 


.]     Schoolmaster. — It  is  now  clearly  established  that  a  mandamus 

will  be  granted,  at  the  instance  of  a  schoolmaster  of  a  grammar  or  other 
public  school,  because  the  office  is  of  a  public  nature,  and  has  temporal 
and  certain  rights  annexed  to  it,  for  which  there  exists  no  other  specific 
legal  remedy. (^)  This  doctrine  was  formerly  doubted,  and  a  mandamus 
r*0F;4.n  ^^^  s^c^^  *an  officer  has  been  refused,  (m)  The  office  of  schoolmas- 
ter has  been  often  stated  to  be  the  lowest  for  which  the  writ  of 
mandamus  will  be  granted.(/t) 

.]  License. — The  writ  lies  to  command  ^e  licensing  of  a  school- 
master, duly  entitled  to  such  license.  But  it  is  a  good  return,  if  the 
candidate  be  in  holy  orders,  that  a  reasonable  time  has  not  been  allowed, 
wherein  to  inquire  into  the  propriety  of  licensing. (o)  So  it  is  a  good 
return  to  such  a  writ,  that  the  ordinary  has  suspended  granting  his  license, 
until  the  party  would  submit  himself  to  be  examined  "  touching  his  suffi- 
ciency in  learning," (jj)  or  as  to  his  morality  and  religion. 

.]     Admission. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  the  due  and  proper 

admission  of  one  appointed  schoolmaster,  to  the  duties  of  his  office. (g') 

.]     Restoration. — The  writ  will  also  be  granted  to  restore  such  a 

schoolmaster,  if  improperly  removed  from  his  office  ;(r)  or  from  the  mas- 

(Z)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  t.  Canterbury  (Archbishop),  8  East,  217,  218.  R.  r.  Mor- 
peth (Bailifits),  Stra.  58.  See  Cos's  case,  1  P.  Wms.  29.  R.  v.  Appleford,  2  Keb. 
862.  R.  V.  Dr.  Bland,  7  Mod.  356,  citing  Stamp's  case,  RaJ^  12.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  40. 
S.  C.  1  Keb.  5,  agreed  in  Hurst's  case,  1  Lev.  75.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  354.  R.  v.  Rush- 
worth,  Kel.  287.  Middleton's  case,  1  Sid.  1G9.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  631.  R.  v.  Canter- 
bury (Archbp.),  15  East,  132.  R.  y.  Litchfield,  &c.  (Ep.),  Stra.  1023.  S.  C.  7 
Mod.  217.  S.  C,  2  Barn.  365,  428.  Withnell  v.  Gartham,  6  T.  R.  388,  390.  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.  See  tits.  "College"  (Master),  "  Dissenters"  (Minister),  "Lec- 
tureship," "  Office"  (Public),  (Fees,  Emoluments,  &c.) 

(to)  The  Protector  v.  Craford,  Sty.  457.  And  see  R.  v.  Patrick,  1  Keb.  835.  R. 
T.  Kingscleere  (ChurchAvardens),  2  Lev.  18.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man.'"  (A.) 

(w)   1  Keb.  354,  and  1  Keb.  631,  supra.     See  tits.  "  Constable,"  "Sexton." 

(o)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Morpeth  (Bailiffs),  T.  3  Geo.  1,  Stra.  58,  cited  in  R. 
V.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  13.  S.  C.  Stra.  1192.  R.  v.  Litchfield  (Ep.),  Stra.  1023. 
S.  C.  2  Barn.  365,  428.  S.  C.  Andr.  367.  S.  C.  2  Kely.  287.  See  tits.  "Bishop," 
"Lectureship"  (License),  "License,"  and  infra,  "Teacher." 

(p)  R.  V.  York  (Archbp.),  6  T.  R.  490.  R.  t.  Canterbury  (Archbp.)  15  East, 
132. 

[q]  R.  V.  Barker,  Burr.  1268.  See  tits.  "College"  (Master,  Admission),  ■"  Dis- 
senters" (Minister,  Admission),  "  Oflice"  (Admission). 

(r)  Ante,  p.  12.  Parkinson's  case,  Comb.  144.  R.  t.  Patrick,  1  Keb.  610.  R. 
T.  Lichfield  (Ep.),  Stra.  1023.  S.  C.  7  Mod.  217.  S.  C.  2  Barn.  365,  428.  R.  v. 
Rushworth,  W.  Kel.  287,  citing  1  Sid.  109.  R.  v.  Darlington  School,  12  L.  J.,  N. 
S.  124,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  6  Q.  B.  682.t  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  67,  Q.  B.  where  see  form 
of  return,  &c.  R.  v.  Morpeth  (Bailiffs),  Stra.  58.  See  tits.  "  College"  (Master, 
Restoration),  "Dissenters,"  "Office"  (Restoration). 


SCHOOL.  305 

tersbip  of  a  free  sclioolj(s)  but  not  if  the  governors  liave  a  discretionary 
power  of  amotion. («) 

•.]      Teacher  ;  License. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  the  grant- 

inf  of  a  license  to  teach  in  a  grammar,  or  other  public  school. (w)  But  it 
is  a  good  return  to  such  a  writ,  that  the  license  is  suspended,  until  a  sub- 
mission to  examination  "  touching  his  sufficiency  in  learning."(v) 

-.]     Admission. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  the  admission  of  a 

teacher  to  his  office,  on  a  suggestion  of  his  due  election,  and  of  the  demand 
and  refusal. («;) 

.]      Undermaster ;    License. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  the 

granting  of  a  license  to  the  undermaster  of  a  public  school. (x) 

* .]     Restoration. — So  the  writ  lies  to  command  restoration  ^..^^rr-, 

to  such  an  office,(j/)  on  illegal  deprivation.  L  -     J 

.]      Usher. — The  writ  will  not  be  granted  where  the  place  is  one 

of  mere  service,  as  usher  of  a  private  school  ;(z)  but  for  the  usher  of  a 
grammar  or  other  public  school,  it  will  lie,  although  he  be  not  a  sworn 
officer,  if  the  office  have  certain  and  temporal  rights  annexed  to  it.(a) 

.]     License. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  granting  of  a  license  ' 

to  one  duly  elected  usher  of  a  free  grammar  school. (6)  But  the  party 
who  licenses  may  take  a  reasonable  time  to  inquire  as  to  the  character  of 
the  party  asking  the  license,(c)  and  may,  therefore,  return  that  he  is  in- 
quiring into  the  truth  of  an  accusation;  on  a  caveat.  ((?) 

[s)  Hermitage's  case,  Comb.  210.  Harcourt  v.  Fox,  Comb.  213.  Northampton's 
case,  Lofft,  549.     See  tit.  "  College." 

[t]  Ante,  p.  12 — 15  ;  Comb.  210,  supra.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration). 

(m)  R.  v.  York  (Archbp.),  6  T.  R.  490.  R.  v.  Kendall,  1  Q.  B.  376.f  S.  C.  4  P. 
&  D.  602.  R.  V.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  132.  See  tits.  "Lectureship" 
(License),  and  supra,  "  Schoolmaster"  (License). 

(v)  6  T.  R.  490,  supra,  n.  {p). 

(w)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Barker,  1  W.  Blac.  299,  351.  S.  C.  Burr.  1265.  See 
supra,  "Schoolmaster,"  and  post,  tit.  "Application"  (Demand  and  Refusal.) 

(x)  R.  V.  Rushworth,  W.  Kel.  287.  See  supra,  "Schoolmaster"  (License), 
"  Teacher"  (License),  and  tit.  "Lectureship"  (License). 

(.?/)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Morpeth  (Bailiffs),  T.  3  Geo.  1,  Stra.  58.  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"  Man."  (A.)  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration),  and  supra,  "  Schoolmaster"  (Resto- 
ration). 

(z)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233,  11.  PoUice's  case,  cited  in  2  Barn. 
365.     See  supra,  "  Schoolmaster,"  and  tit.  "  Office"  (Public). 

(«)  Ante,  p.  12.  Per  Glyn,  C.  J.,  in  City  Works'  case,  2  Sid.  112.  Stamp's 
case,  1  Sid.  40.  S.  C.  Raym.  12.  Middleton's  case,  1  Sid.  169.  The  Protector 
T.  Craford,  Sty.  457.  R.  v.  Morpeth  (Bailiffs),  Stra.  59.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man." 
(A.)     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  C.     See  tits.  "  Lectureship,"  "  Office"  (Sworn  officer). 

(6)  R.  V.  Litchfield  (Ep.),  7  Mod.  217.  S.  C.  Kel.  287.  S.  C.  Stra.  1023.  S.  C. 
2  Barn.  365,  428.  S.  C.  Andr.  367.  S.  C.  Com.  448.  R.  v.  Cory,  3  Keb.  855. 
S.  C.  2  Lev.  222.  And  see  1  Vent.  41.  Tatler  v.  Reynolds,  M.  10  Wm.  3,  cited  in 
2  Barn.  365.  In  R.  t.  Wallis,  T.  12  Geo.  1,  Parker,  C.  J.,  and  Powis  and  Eyre,  JJ., 
held  it  would  lie  ;  Pratt  contra :  and  the  Court  said  there  were  several  authorities 
in  Styles,  since  that  case,  that  a  mandamus  would  lie  as  above,  and  said  that  of 
late  mandamuses  had  been  carried  much  further  than  formerly.  See  tit.  "  Lec- 
tureship" (License).  See  supra,  "  Schoolmaster"  (License),  "Teacher"  (License), 
"Under  Master"  (License). 

(c)  7  Mod.  217,  supra.  S.  C.  Stra.  1023.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3.  Supra, 
"  Schoolmaster"  (License),  p.  254. 

{d)  Supra,  p.  254,  n.  (o). 

May,  1852.— 20 


80G  tapping's   mandamus. 

.]     .     Restoration. — The  writ  will  also  be  granted  to  com- 


mand restoration  to  the  office  of  ushcr,(fi)  but  not  if  there  be  visitors,  and 
they  have  amoved  him;(/)  or  where  he  is  appointed  durante  bene  placito 
merely,  (^r) 

Schoolmaster.]  See  titles  CoUege  (^Master) ;  Scliool  {Schoolmaster) ; 
University. 

Scriveners'  Company.] — Admission;  Swearing  in. — The  writ  lies 
to  command  the  Scriveners'  Company  to  admit  and  swear  in  one  duly 
entitled  to  its  freedom,  in  order  that  he  may  become  and  practise  as  a 
notary.  (7() 

r*9rp-i      *Seal  Affixing.]     Scq  titles  Administration  (tcJien  granted) ; 
College;    Corjwration  (^Municipal);    Hospital;   Recorder  (^Elec- 
tion);   University  (High  Steward.) 

Secondary  of  Clerk  of  the  Crown.]  Swearing  in. — The  writ  has 
been  granted  to  command  a  swearing  in  to  the  office  of  Secondary  of  the 
Clerk  of  the  Crown. (i) 

Second  Curate.]  See  titles  Curate,  p.  113,  n.  (g);  Office  (known 
to  the  Law),  p.  175,  n.  (g). 

Secretary  of  the  Court  of  Marches.]     See  title  Marches. 

Serjeant.]  The  writ  lies  for  the  office  of  serjeant  of  a  municipal  cor- 
poration. (7) 

Serjeant  op  the  Mace.]     Swearing  in. — The  writ  lies  not  in  gen- 

(e)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Patrick,  1  Keb.  610.  S.  C.  Raym.  111.  R.  v.  Rushworlh, 
Kel.  287,  citing  1  Sid.  169.  See  tit.  "Office"  (Restoration),  and  supra,  "School- 
master" (Restor.ation),  "Under  Master"  (Restoration). 

(/)  R.  V.  St.  Catliarine  Hall,  4  T.  R.  235.  And  see  Dr.  Witherington's  case,  1 
Keb.  2,  50,  &c.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  23.  S.  C.  Sid.  Yl.  See  tits.  "College"  (Visitor), 
"  Visitor." 

(.9)  .-Vnte,  p.  12.  Tlie  Protector  v.  Craford,  Sty.  457.  Stamp's  case,  1  Keb.  5. 
S.  C.  Raym.  12.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  93  b.  Co veney's  case,  Dyer,  209.  See  tits. 
"Office"  (Freehold),  "  Recorder"  (Restoration). 

(h)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Scriveners'  (Society)  1  G.  &  D.  G41.'  Scriveners'  Com- 
pany V.  R.,  3  G.  &  D.  272.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  939  jf  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  90,  as  to  notaries 
public.  U.  V.  Scriveners'  Company,  10  B.  &  C.  511.  S.  C.  5  M.  &  R.  543.  In  re 
Taylor,  5  B.  &  A.  538. f  See  tits.  "  Company,"  "  Franchise,"  "  Freedom"  (Com- 
pany, Swearing  in),  "Freeman,"  "  Office"  (Admission,  Swearing  in). 

(?)  Ante,  p.  12  ;  cited  in  Townsend's  case,  1  Keb.  458.  See  tit.  "Office"  (Swear- 
ing in). 

(j:  3  Roll.  Abr.  456,  1.  20,  32.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  See  tit.  "  Corpora- 
tion Municipal,"  "Office,"  "  SL>rjeant  of  Mace." 

As  to  the  election  of  serje  int.  see  stat.  G  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App.,  the  requisitions  of 
which  should  be  followed.  This  statute  has  not  been  extended  to  Ireland.  See 
Btal.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12  (I.),  App.  ij  .  v 


SEXTON.  307 

cral  to  swear  in  a  (serviens  ad  clavam),  scrjcant  of  the  mace  to  his  office, 
because  usually  he  is  but  aa  officer  dative  and  removable  at  the  pleasure 
of  the  mayor,  like  the  clerk  of  the  waterworks  ia  London. (/i;) 

.]     Restoration. — But  afterwards  the  Court  commanded  the  mayor 

of  Bodmin  to  restore  the  serjeant-at-macc,  upon  a  suggestion  that  it  was 
an  office  for  life,  and  not  a  mere  voluntary  employment. (/) 

.]     Delivery  of  Mace,  iScc. — If  on  the   discharge  of  a  serjcant  of 

mace  he  refuse  to  deliver  up  the  mace  to  his  successors,  yet  a  mandamus 
has  been  refused  to  compel  him  so  to  do.(m) 

Severn,  Water  Bailife  of.]  Restoration. — The  writ  has  been 
denied  to  command  the  restoration  of  the  water  bailiff  of  the  river  Severn 
to  his  office,  although  a  patent  officer;  Holt,  C.  J.,  when  refusing  the 
writ,  said,  ''  that  he  was  not  for  granting  a  mandamus  where  an  ^^.f^r^-, 
assize  lieth,"(?(.)  but  it  is  ^apprehended  that  at  this  day,  the  remedy  L  " 
by  assize  having  fallen  entirely  into  desuetude,  it  would  in  such  case  be 
granted,  (o) 

Sewers.]  Expenditor,  Exemption. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to 
exempt  the  archdeacon  of  Rochester  from  being  expenditor  to  commis- 
sioners of  sewers,  it  being  a  secular  office  and  inferior  to  his  degree. (p) 

.]     As  to  sewers  see  title  Drainage. 

Sexton.]  The  writ  of  mandamus  does  not  lie  for  a  place  of  mere  ser- 
vice or  employment,  but  for  an  office  as  that  of  sexton  it  does  lie  5(5') 
althouch  the  writ  has  been  granted  for  this  office  ever  since  the  time  of 
Lord  Holt,(r)  yet  it  has  been  confessed  to  be  the  lowest  in  the  scale  of 
offices  for  which  the  writ  has  been  awarded,  (s) 

This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows; — 

{k)  Ante,  p.  175,  176.  R.  v.  Winter,  2  Keb.  134,  which  was  as  to  the  Serjeant  of 
Stafford.  R.  v.  Dartmouth  (Mayor),  3  Salk.  229.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) ;  2 
Roll.  Abr.  tit.  "  Restitution,"  pi.  7. 

{I)  Ante,  p.  175.  R.  v.  Barnard,  2  Keb.  402,  but  Twisden,  J.,  doubted,  because 
he  was  no  officer  of  government,  but  like  the  clerk  of  the  Waterworks  in  London. 
Anon.,  Comb.  287  ;  3  Salk.-  229,  2,  where  see  a  return.  See  tits.  "  Corporation" 
(Municipal),  "  Office,"  "  Swordbearcr." 

(to)  R.  v.  Todd,  2  Jur.  565.     See  tit.  "  Insignia." 

(«)  Ante,  p.  5,  n.  (A),  1"9,  20,  n.  {q).  River  Severn's  case,  Comb.  347.  See  tit. 
"Office"  (Public). 

(0)  See  ante,  p. '5,  n.  (A),  and  tit.  "Office." 

\p)  Dr.  Lee  or  Warner's  case,  2  Keb.  693,  citing  2  Inst.  3.  See  tits."  Drainage," 
"  Expenditor,"  "  Office." 

{q)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233,  13,  also  cited  in  R.  v.  Canterbury 
(Archbishop),  8  East,  218.  Vide  Burn's  Eccl.  Law,  319,  tit.  "  Sexton."  Isle's  case, 
Ray.  211,  S.  C.  1  Vent.  143.  S.  C.  Id.  153.  S.  C.  2  Lev.  18.  S.  C.  March.  101,  cited 
in  il.  V.  Dr.  Bland,  7  Mod.  356.  See  also  Oliver  v.  Ingram,  7  Mod.  267.  S.  C.  Stra. 
1114,  where  the  law  as  to  sextons  is  fully  discussed.  11.  v.  Morpeth  (Bailiffs),  Stra. 
58.  R.  v.  Stoke  Damerel  (Minister),  1  N.  &  P.  56.f  S.  C.  5  A  &  E.  584.f  See 
tits.  "  Office,"  "  Schoolmaster,"  ante,  p.  254,  n.  (n). 

(7-)  R.  V.  London  (Aldermen),  2  Barn.  393.     Nat.  Brev.  218. 

(s)R.  V.  Appleford,  2  Keb.  862.  Sec  tits.  "Constable,"  "Office"  (Ministerial, 
Inferior),  "  School,"  (Schoolmaster.) 


308 


tapping's     MANDAMrS. 


Sexton 

Election 
Admission 


Sexton- — Swearing  in     - 

- 

-  257 

257 

llestoratiou 

- 

-  257 

257 

Returns 

- 

-  258 

.]  Election. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  minister  and  church- 
wardens of  a  parish  to  convene  a  meeting  within  the  parish,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  electing  a  proper  person  to  fill  the  office  of  sexton. (?) 

.]     Admission. — After  the  election  of  a  sexton,  the  writ  lies  to 

command  his  admission  to  his  office. (m) 

.]     Swearing  in. — The  writ  lies  to  swear  him  into  his  office. («) 

.]    Restoration. — The  writ  lies  also  to  command  churchwardens, 

&c.  to  restore  to  the  office  of  parish  sexton  on  unjust  deprivation,  it  being 
a  freehold,  and  the  duty  of  the  officer  being  to  take  care  of  the  church. 
It  was  not  until  after  time  taken  by  the  Court  to  consider  whether  any 
precedents  would  warrant  the  writ  in  such  a  case,  that  it  was  granted;  it 
was  much  doubted  at  first,  as  it  was  contended,  that  a  sexton  was  rather 
a  servant,  than  an  ^officer  who  has  a  freehold  in  his  office. (ir)  The 
L  zooj  Qj^jgj,  caggg  stew  that  on  the  application  for  the  writ,  there  was 
usually  produced  to  the  Court  a  certificate  from  the  minister  and  some  of 
the  inhabitants  of  the  parish,  of  the  existence  of  a  custom  to  choose  a  sex- 
ton, whose  appointment  was  for  life,  and  of  the  fees  attached  to  the  office 
as  that  he  should  have  two  pence  per  year  for  every  house  within  the 
parish.  But  sucb  certificate  is  now  dispensed  with,(.r)  it  having  been 
settled  that  if  it  appear,  that  the  office  is  elective,  and  has  certain  custom- 
ary perquisites  as  freehold,  as  in  some  cathedrals,  the  writ  will  be  granted, 
but  otherwise  not.(^)  Thus,  if  the  sexton  by  virtue  of  his  office  gather 
all  the  toll,  he  will  be  restored,  but  not  so  where  he  is  a  mere  servant,  or 
there  is  no  suggestion  of  any  of  the  above  special  facts,  for  in  the  latter 
case  the  Court  will  consider  it  to  be  a  place  at  will  merely. (2) 

.]     Returns. — A  return  to  a  mandamus  to  restore  to  the  office  of 

sexton,  alleged  that  the  prosecutor  was  not  duly  elected  and  sworn  sexton 


S.  C.  6  A.  &E.584.f     S.  C.  2  II.  &  W. 
7  A.  &  E.  257.t     See  tits.  "  Churchwar- 


Nightingale  x.  Marshall,  3  D.  &  R.  549.f 


[t)  R.  V.  Stoke  Damerel,  1  N.  &  P.  SG.f 
346,  cited  in  R.  v.  Birmingham  (Rector), 
den,"  "  Office"  (Election,)  "  Parish." 

{u)  Cited  in  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  12G7. 
See  tit.  "  Office"  (Admission). 

{v)  March.  101  ;  2  Roll.  Abr.  234,  1.  35,  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  Anon.,  7  Mod. 
118.     See  tits.  "  Oaths,"  "  Office,"  (Swearing  in),  and  ante,  p.  12. 

ho)  Ante,  p.  12.  Isle's  case,  Raym.  211 ;  1  Vent.  143,  (cited  and  approved  in  2  T.R. 
183,  n.  {b),  153.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  802.  S.  C.  cited  in  Olive  v.  Ingram,  7  Mod.  267,  H.32, 
H.  6,  31.  Sexton  may  be  a  parson,  2  Keb.  807,  820,  S.  C.  S.  C.  2  Lev.  18,  nom. 
R.  V.  Kingsclccre  (Churchwardens).  Isle's  case,  cited  in  R.  v.  Rushworth,  Kel. 
287,  and  in  R.  v.  Blooer,  Burr.  1044.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.|  See  R.  v.  Sir 
Rich.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233,  13,  15.  R.  v.  Taunton  (Churchwardens),  1  Cowp.  413. 
Anon.,  Frcem.  21.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  182,  n.  (i).  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 
C.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration). 

(x)  R.  V.  Kingscleere  (Churchwardens),  2  Lev.  19.     See  tit.  "  Custom." 

(y)  Isle's  case,  2  Keb.  BOG,  per  Hales,  C.  J.,  the  whole  Court  agreeing.  See  also 
R.  v.  Stoke  Damerel  (Minister),  1  N.  &  P.  SG.f  S.  C.  5  A.  &  E.  584.t  S.  C.  2  H.  & 
W.  34G.     See  tit.  "  Office,"  (Fees,  &c.) 

{z)  Supra,  n.  {b)  ;  and  sec  R.  v.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233,  13,  15.  See  tits.  "Guard- 
ians of  Poor"  (Clerk), '•  Oflice." 


SHIP. 


S09 


accordino-  to  the  ancient  custom  of  the  parish,  and  secondly,  that  there 
was  a  custom  of  the  inhabitants,  &c.  to  elect  and  remove  at  pleasure,  and 
that  the  prosecutor  was  so  removed  pursuant  to  such  custom  ;  which 
returns  were  held  good,  and  not  inconsistent. («) 

Shares.]     See  title  Companij  (^SJiares,  Calls.) 

Sheriff.]  Swearing  in. — The  writ  lies  to  swear  in  a  sheriff  to  his 
office. ((^) 

.]     Duties,  &c. — A  performance  of  all  those   legal  duties   of  a 

sheriff,  for  the  neglect  of  which  there  is  no  specific  legal  remedy,  may  be 
commanded  by  mandamus. (r) 

.]     Deliver)/  of  Rolls,  (£,-c.— The  writ  also  lies  to  command   the 

ex-sheriffs  to  deliver  over  all  official  rolls,  &c.,  to  the  new  oues.('0 

* .]      Compensation. — As  to  compensation  for  loss  of  fees,  r*o59i 

see  title  Compensation  (Sheriff). 

.]  Sheriff's'  Court. — As  to  Sheriffs'  Court,  see  titles  Courts  In- 
ferior {Sheriff's'  Court);   Sheriff's'  Court). 

Sheriffs'  Court.]     See  titles  Courts  Inferior  (^Slieriff's  Court). 

Sheriffs'  Court,  London,  Judge  of.]  Swearing  in. — The  writ  has 
been  granted  to  command  the  swearing  in  of  the  Judge  of  the  Sheriffs' 
Court,  London,  the  election  and  nomination  of  whom  is  in  the  common 
council,  and  not  in  the  lord  mayor  or  sheriffs.(e) 

Ship.]  Registration. — The  writ  lies  on  a  proper  case  to  command  the 
registry  of  vessels  as  British  vessels. (/) 

.]      Certificate  of  Registration. — The  writ  will  also  be  granted  to 

command  the  due  granting  of  a  certificate  of  the  registry  of  a  transfer  of 
a  ship,  pursuant  to  stat.  3-1  Geo.  3,  c.  68, (^)  if  all  proper  parties  have 
joined  in  the  transfer  thereof,(/t)  and  the  ship  should  of  course  be  register- 
ed. (0 

(a)R.  V.Taunton  (Churchwardens),  Cowp.  413.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  3. 
See  post,  tit.  "Return." 

[b)  Ante  p.  12.  Papilion's  case,  Skin.  64,  where  see  as  to  how  the  writ  should 
be  directed.  R.  v.  Woodrow,  2  T.  R.  732.  And  see  Scarborough's  case,  Stra.  1180  ; 
Trera.  PI.  Cor.  452,  where  see  form  of  writ.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Swearing  in). 

(c)  See  tits.  "  Compensation"  (Assessing),  "  Office"  (Duties,  &c.) 

((?)  Sherifl"  of  Nottingham's  case,  12  Car.  2,  B.R.  Hurst's  case,  1  Keb.  387.  See 
tits.  "Books,"  "  Company,"  "Corporation"  (^lunicipal),  "  County,"  "  Records." 

(e)  Ante,  p.  12.  Thompson  v.  Goodfellow,  2  Show.  173,  citing  Proctor  v.  Philip, 
Hardr.  311,  327.  See  tits.  "Bristol,"  "Courts  Inferior"  (Sheriffs'  Court),  "Office" 
(Swearing  in),  "  Sheriffs'  Court." 

( f)  R.  V.  Arnaud,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  50,  Q.  B.,  where  see  form  of  writ  and  return. 
See  tits.  "Customs,"  "  OtHce"  (Enforcing  Duty,  &c.),  "Registers  of  Middlesex." 

{g)  R.  V.  Customs  (Collector),  2  M.  &  S.  223.     R.  v.  The  Customs  (Collector),  1 
M.  &  S.  261.     See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  (Certificate),  "  Customs." 
(A)  Ante,  p.  27,  28 ;  2  M.  &  S.  223,  supra, 
(i)  1  M.  &  S.  261,  supra,  n.  [g). 


310  tapping's    mandamus. 

SiDESMF.N.]  Election. — The  "writ  lies  to  command  a  notice  to  be  given 
to  hold  a  meeting  for  the  purpose  of  electing  sidesmen, Q')  for  the  year 
ensuing.  (Z:) 

.]     Swearing  in. — The  writ  lies  also  to  command  the  swearing  in 

of  a  sidesman. (?) 

.]     Rule. — It  is  admitted  that  the  rule  is   absolute  in  the  first 

instance,  in  analogy  with  the  practice  as  to  cliurchwardeDS..(»i) 

Sister.]     Qee  titles  Hospital  (Sister,  Eestoration)  ;    Office;    Visitor. 

r*orm      *Skinners'  Company,   Assistant  of.]     The  writ  has  been 
*-  ^       granted  for  the  assistant  of  company  as  the  Skinners'  Company. («) 

SouTHWARK,  Borough  Court  op.]  See  thtla?,  Attomeij ;  Corpora- 
tion Municipal  (Duties);   Courts  Inferior  (Southioark). 

Spiritual  Court.]  See  titles  Courts  Inferior  (Spiritual  Courts); 
Courts  Sujjerior;    Office;  Proctor ;  Registrar. 

Stall.]  See  titles  Bishop;  Canon;  Cathedral  Stall;  Dean;  Pre- 
hendiarij. 

Stannaries  Court.]  See  titles  Courts  Inferior  (Stannaries  Cotcrt, 
Hearing). 

Statute  Duty.]     See  title  Highwai/  (Statute  Duty). 

Steward.]  Restoration. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to  restore  to  the 
office  of  steward  of  a  city  corporation (o)  or  Court. (^) 

.]     High,  Swearing  in. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  swearing 

in  of  a  high  steward,  for  he  is  a  public  officer,  (j) 

(y)  For  the  nature  of  this  office,  and  for  the  origin  of  the  term  Sidesmen  or 
Synodsmea,  see  Burn's  Eccl.  Law,  tit.  "  Churchwarden."  And  see  tits.  "  Office," 
"  Parish"  (Meeting). 

{k)  R.  V.  St.  James,  Westminster  (Churchwardens),  5  A.  &  E.  391, f  also  cited  in 
Campbell  v.  Maund,  5  A.  &  E.  876. f  See  tits.  "  Churchwarden"  (Election),  "  Office" 
(Election),  "  Overseers." 

[l)  R.  V.  Middlesex  (Archdeacon),  3  A.  &  E.  GlB.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  49G.t  Ex 
parte  Duffield,  3  A.  &  E.  6l7.f  See  tits.  "  Churchwarden"  (Swearing  in),  "Office" 
(Swearing  in),  "  Overseers." 

(m)  Ex  parte  Winfield,  3  A.  &  E.  GH.f  Ex  parte  Duffield,  3  A.  &  E.  GlS.f  S.  C. 
6  N.  .fe'M.  865.f  See  tits.  "  Churchwarden"  (Swearing  in,  Rule).  See  post,  tit. 
"  Rule." 

(n)  R.  V.  Oxenden,  1  Show.  219.  See  tits.  "Company,"  "Franchise,"  "Free- 
dom" (Company),  "Office." 

(o)  R.  V.  liaise,  1  Keb.  20.  See  tits.  "Colchester,"  "Reading"  (Steward),  "Strat- 
ford-upon-Avon" (Steward). 

{p)  See  tits.  '•  Bristol,"  "  Manor"  (Steward  of  Leet),  "  Office"  (Public). 

{q)  See  supra,  n.  (o),  {p).  Anon.,  M.  1652,  Sty.  355;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man." 
(A.);  also  cited  in  the  Protector  v.  Crawford,  Sty.  458.  Sec  tits.  "Colchester," 
"  Office,"  "  University"  (High  Steward). 


TITUE.  311 

Steward  op  Court  Baron.]     See  title  Manor  [Baron  Steward). 

Steward  of  CorYiiOLD  Court.]    Sec  title  Manor  (^Copjlwhl  Coiirt). 

Steward  of  Court  Leet.]     See  title  Manor  {Led  S(eicard). 

Stipendiary  Curate.]     Bcq  iitlea  Curate  (Sti^endiari/) ;  Salary. 

Stratford-upon-Avon,  Steward  of.]  Restoration. — The  writ  does 
not  lie  to  restore  the  steward  of  Stratford-upon-Avon,  it  being  but  an 
oflGice  durante  bene  placito.(r) 

Surgeon.]     ^qq  \Ai\cs  Hospital  {Surgeon)  ;   Office  {Puhlic). 

Surgeons'  Company.]     See  titles  Apprentice;  Freedom;  Hospital. 

^Surveyors  of  Highways.]  See  title  Hlghioays  {Sur-  i-t.2(3i"] 
ve7/or.) 

Surveyor  of  New  River.]  See  title  JVew  River  Water  {Sar- 
Tcyor.^ 

Swordbearer.]  Restoration. — The  writ  lies  to  restore  to  the  office 
of  swordbearer  of  a  municipal  corporation. (.s) 

Taxation  op  Costs.]  See  titles  Compensation  {Costs') ;  Costs;  Man- 
damus (  Costs.) 

Teacher.]     See  titles  CbZ^e^e;   School  {Teacher) ;  Unioerslt)/. 

Thames  Court  of  Conservency.]  See  title  Courts  Inferior  { Thames 
Conservancy.) 

Tithe.]  Modus. — The  Court  will  grant  the  writ  to  command,  the 
prosecution  of  an  inquiry  as  to  the  existence  of  a  modus,  under  an  inclo- 
sure  act.(^) 

But  where  a  tithe  commissioner,  during  the  pendency  of  a  suit  for  the 
recovery  of  tithes,  had  proceeded  to  inquire  as  to  the  validity  of  a  modus, 

{?■)  Digbton  V.  Stratford  Corp.),  1  Sid.  461.  See  tits.  "Colchester"  (High  Ste- 
ward of ),"  Office"  (Freehold),  "Reading"  (Steward),  "Steward,"  "Town  Clerk" 
(Restoration,  Returns),  and  ante,  p.  12. 

(s)  R.  V.  Bristol  (Mayor),  1  Show.  228,  the  return' being  "absence  and  non-at- 
tendance ou  tlie  mayor  in  divcrsis  progressibui  suis  per,  &;c."  S.  C.  Comb.  145. 
S.  C.  Garth.  199.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  See  tits.  "  Office,"  "  Serjeant  of  Mace," 
and  ante,  p.  198. 

{t)  Anon.,  2  Chit.  251,  Sec  tit.  "Inclosure."  The  rule  in  such  a  case  has 
been  directed  to  be  served  ou  the  vicar  and  impropriator.  See  post,  tit.  "  Rule" 
(Service). 


312  tapping's   mandamus. 

under  stat.  G  &  7  Win.  4,  c.  71,  s.  45,  but  Lad  declined  to  make  his 
award  until  the  tithe  suits  should  be  at  an  end,  the  Court  refused,  under 
the  circumstances  disclosed  by  the  case,  to  command  him,  by  mandamus, 
to  make  his  award. (h) 

.]  Compensation. — The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the  sum- 
moning of  a  compensation  jury,  in  order  to  assess  damage  for  loss  of 
tithe  sustained  by  a  rector  or  vicar,  by  reason  of  land  having  been  con- 
verted to  a  purpose  which  rendered  it  incapable  of  producing  tithe,  unless 
the  case  be  especially  within  an  act  of  Parliament,  &c.;  because  such 
rector  or  vicar  is  not  interested  in  the  land  out  of  which  the  tithe  ariscs,(i:) 
but  in  the  latter  only  when  produced. 

.]      Case. — As  to  a  mandamus  to  state  a  case,  in  pursuance  of 

stat.  6  &  7  Wm.  4,  c.  71,  ss.  37,  45. (u') 

Title.]  See  titles  Dujnity,  Knight;  University  (^Academical  De- 
grees.) 

r*or->l  *TiVERTON,  Twenty-four  Men  of.]  As  to  the  office  of  one 
^  ~  of  the  twenty-four  men  of  Tiverton,  see  tit.  Ashhurton  (^Eight 
Men  of.) 

Toleration  Act.]  The  wi-it  has  been  granted,  on  several  occasions, 
to  command  justices  to  administer  to  one  duly  entitled  the  oaths,  and  to 
permit  him  to  subscribe  the  declaration  required  by  the  Toleration  Act,  1 
Wm.  &  M.  St.  1,  c.  18.(x) 

Tolls.]     See  titles  Canal  Comjiany  [Tolls;)  Highway  (^Tolls.) 
ToLT.]     See  title  Courts  Inferior  [Tolt.) 

Tolzey  Cotjrt  of  Bristol.]  See  titles  Bristol ;  Courts  Inferior 
{Tolzey  Court.) 

Town  Clerk.]  The  wi-it  lies  for  the  office  of  town  clerk,  because  it 
is  both  public,  and  prima  facie  a  freehold. (y) 

{it)  In  re  Tithe  Commissioners,  1  D.,  N.  S.  810.  See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament," 
"Award." 

{«)  Ante,  p.  27,  23.  R.  v.  Nene  Outfall,  9  B.  &  C.  882,1  also  cited  in  R.  v.  Lon- 
don Dock,  5  A.  &  E.  173,  175.f     See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Compensation." 

[ic)  R.  V.  Tithe  Commissioners,  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  109,  Q.  B.  See  tits.  "Act  of 
Parliament,"  "Case,"  "Courts  Inferior"  (Case),  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Case). 

(z)  R.  V.  Denbysh.  (J.),  14  East,  284.  R.  v.  Gloucestersh.  (J.),  15  East,  582. 
And  see  tits.  "Alderman"  (Restoration,  Return),  "Allegiance"  (Oath  of),  "Col- 
lege," "  Oaths,"  "  Office"  (Restoration,  Return,  Oaths). 

(y)  Ante,  p.  12.  Awdley's  case,  Poph.  176.  S.  C.  Latch.  123.  S.  C.  Xoj,  78. 
Digh ton's  case,  1  Vent.  77,  82.  R.  v.  Campion,  1  Sid.  14.  The  Protector  v.  Cra- 
ford,  Sty.  457.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  R.  v.  New  River,  1  Keb.  030,  citing 
Boston  Clerk's  case.  R.  v.  Hereford,  1  Keb.  716.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  209.  See  Stamp's 
case,  Raym.  12  j  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (C),  and  tit.  "  Office"  (Freehold). 


TOWN     CLERK. 


313 


This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


Town  Cleuk. — Restoration 

-  263 

-  262 

Returns 

-  264 

-  262 

Records,  &c. 

-  264 

-  262 

Delivery 

-  264 

Town  Clerk. 

Election         -         -         - 
Admission  and  Swearing  in 
Returns 

].     Election. — The  writ  lies  to  command  an  election  of  a  town 

clerk;  and  it  \^oull  seem,  that  to  such  a  mandamus,  a  rettirn  "that  before 
the  arrival  of  the  writ,  one  (J.  S.)  was  duly  chosen  and  sworn  into  the 
said  office,"  is  good.(2) 

.]     Admission  and  Swearing  in. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command 

an  admission  and  swearing  in  to  the  office  of  town  clerk,  (a) 

*The  writ  lies  also  to  admit,  after  the  death  of  B.,  a  town  clerk  |-^;,go-| 
who  was  elected  to  the  office  as  reversioner,  after  the  death  of  B.  (h)  L  ^ 

.]     Returns. — To  a  mandamus  to  admit,  it  is  not  a  good  return, 

that  the  prosecutor  had  not  taken  the  oaths  before  the  mayor,  according 
to  the  Stat.  13  Car.  2,  c.  1,  for  he  might  have  taken  them  before  two  jus- 
tices; but  to  an  officer  who  is  bound  to  take  the  oaths,  it  is  no  excuse 
that  they  were  not  tendered  to  him.(c)  Nor  is  it  a  good  return  that  he 
is  not  qualified  to  act.  (of) 

.]     Restoration. — The  writ  also  lies  to  command  restoration  to 

the  office  of  town  clerk  after  illegal  deprivation. (e) 

The  writ  has  also  been  granted  to  command  restoration,  or  rather  ad- 

(z)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Chapman,  6  Mod.  152,  and  cases  there  cited.  See  stat. 
6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  App.,  as  to  proceedings  necessary  to  be  taken  previously  to  an 
application  for  a  mandamus  to  proceed  to  an  election  of  any  corporate  officer  in 
any  of  the  boroughs  in  that  act  mentioned :  this  act  does  not  extend  to  Ireland. 
See  tit.  "Office"  (Election),  and  post,  tit.  "Return." 

(a)  Ante,  p.  12.  R  v.  Hereford  (Mayor),  6  Mod.  309.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  701.  Town 
Clerk  of  Oxon's  case,  Comb.  244.  See  Patrick's  case,  Raym.  111.  R.  v.  Knapton, 
2  Keb.  445,  in  which  case  the  defendants  refused  to  swear  him  without  payment 
of  a  fee.  And  see  Latch.  123,  Awdley's  case.  5  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  5.  R. 
V.  Slatford,  5  Mod.  316.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  428.  S.  C.  Comb.  419.  S.  C.  Holt,  438.  R. 
v.  Oxford,  (Mayor),  2  Jones,  121;  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  456,  where  see  a  form  of  writ. 
See  tits.  "  Aldermen,"  "  Councilmen." 

{h)  Awdley's  case,  Poph.  176.  S.  C.  Latch.  123.  S.  C.  Noy.  78 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."  (A.),  and  see  infra,  "  Restoration."  As  to  an  office  in  fiera,  ante,  p.  113, 
n.  (<7),  175,  n.  H).  ^    ^ 

(c)  Ante,  p.  187,  n.  {p).  R.  v.  Slatford,  5  Mod.  316.  S.  0.  2  Salk.  428.  S.  C. 
Comb.  419.  S.  S.  Holt,  438.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  2  Jones,  121.  See  tits.  "Oaths," 
"Office,"  (Restoration,  Return,  Oaths). 

((^)Ante,  p.  72,  n.  (e).  R.  v.  Slatford,  supra.  See  tits.  "Churchwarden"  (Swear- 
ing in,  Returns),  "  Office"  (Admission,  Return,  Not  qualified). 

(e)  Ante,  p.  12.  Awdley  v.  Joy,  Poph.  176,  in  which  cases  are  cited  of  similar 
writs  having  been  granted,  an.  16  Eliz.  ;  it  is  there  also  stated  by  Fcnnor,  J.,  that 
a  like  writ  of  restitution  was  granted  in  43  Eliz.  S.  C.  Latch.  123.  S.  C.  Noy,  78. 
R  V  Hereford,  1  Keb.  655.  S.  0.  1  Sid.  209.  R.  v.  Glocester  (Mayor),  2  Show. 
504  S.  C.  1  Roll.  409.  S.  C.  1  Bulst.  189.  R.  v.  Durham  (Corp.),  10  Mod.  146. 
Dighton  V.  Stratford  (Corp.),  2  Keb.  641,  656.  S.  C.  1  Vent.  77,  82.  S.  C.  1  Lev. 
291.  S.  C.  Raym.  188.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  461.  See  Stamp's  case,  Raym.  12.  R.  v. 
0.xon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  428.  Anon.,  1  Sid.  255,  257.  Verrior  v.  Sandwich  (Mayor), 
1  Sid.  305.  Campion's  case,  1  Sid.  14.  S.  C.  2  Sid.  97.  R.  v.  Axbridge  (Mayor), 
Cowp.  523.  Sec  The  Protector  v.  Craford,  Sty.  457,  citing  Pasch.  2  Car.,  Latch, 
124.     Co.  Litt.  233.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration.) 


314  tapping's    mandamus. 

mittancc,  to  tlic  office  of  town  clerk,  to  -wbicli  the  applicant  had  been 
appointed  remainderman,  the  office  having  fallen  into  possession,  but  to 
which  he  had  never  been  admitted. (/) 

So  the  writ  to  restore,  &c.  was  granted  where  a  town  clerk  had  been 
elected  alderman,  in  order  to  oust  him  of  his  office  of  town  clerk,  the 
offices  being  incompatihh.^ij')  So;  where  the  town  clerk  had  been  impro- 
perly elected  mayor. (/i) 

r*9m  *T^6  ^""i*  <iocs  not,  however,  lie  to  restore  a  town  clerk,  remov- 
L  -"  able  "  ad  libitum."(«')  Nor  will  the  Court  restore  such  an  officer, 
if  it  be  confessed  that  he  was  rightly,  though  informally,  removed. (J)  Nor 
after  he  has  neglected  the  duties  of  the  office,  because  that  is  sufficient 
cause  both  of  removal  and  return. (/c) 

.]     Returns. — A  return  to  such  a  mandamus,  that  the  prosecutor 

was  annuatim  eligibilis,  is  not  good,  inasmuch  as  the  office  is  prima  facie 
one  for  life,(/)  unless  restrained  by  charter  or  prescription,  which  ought 
to  be  shewn  on  the  return ;  besides,  although  the  prosecutor  might  be 
annuatim  eligibilis,  yet  he  will  continue  town  clerk  until  another  be 
chosen.  If,  however,  the  return  had  been  "  eligibilis  pro  uno  anno  tan- 
turn,"  it  would  have  been  good ;  for  the  office  would  have  expired  at  the 
end  of  the  year,  whether  another  chosen  or  not.(??i)  A  return  of  an  autho- 
rity to  grant,  and  an  appointment  to  the  office,  durante  bene  placito,  or 
ad  libitum,  and  a  subsequent  removal,  is  good  ;  notwithstanding  no  cause 
of  removal  be  returned,  and  the  party  deprived  have  not  been  summoned 
to  answer;(H)  because  the  office  is  a  merely  ministerial  one ;  but  after 

(/)  Awdley's  case,  Poph.  lYG.  S.  C.  Latch.  123.  S.  C.  Noy,  78.  Supra,  n. 
{b)  (e),  ia  which  case  Whitlock  and  Jones,  JJ.,  stated,  that  in  the  case  of  one  Con- 
stable, 10  Eliz.,  it  was  resolved  that  the  Court  had  power  of  restitution,  and  cited 
Wittlecott's  case,  whereupon  Noy  (Counsel)  said,  that  there  were  precedents  to 
prove  this  in  the  times  of  Edw.  2,  Edw.  3,  and  Hen.  6  ;  upon  which  it  was  re- 
marked by  the  Justices,  that  "  they  (the  Justices)  are  the  chief  conservators  of  the 
peace  within  the  realm,  and  therefore  have  power,  for  the  preservation  of  the  peace 
in  such  factious  towns  (Coventry),  to  grant  restitution."  See  note  to  Middleton's 
case,  2  Dyer,  332  b,  333,  pi.  28. 

(^)  See  ante,  p.  197,  n.  (c).  Boston's  case,  cited  in  Awdley's  case.  Latch.  123. 
S.  C.  Poph.  176.  R.  V.  Godwin,  1  Doug.  397.  See  Milward  v,  Thatcher,  2  T.  R. 
81,  and  the  cases  there  cited.  See  tit.  "Office."  (Restoration,  Return,  Incompati- 
ble Office). 

{h)  Verrior  v.  Sandwich  (Mayor),  1  Sid.  305 ;  2  Keb.  92  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit  "  Office," 
(K.)     See  ante,  tit.  "  Mayor." 

(t)  Ante,  p.  176.  R.  v.  Campion,  1  Sid.  15 ;  1  Vent.  77,  82 ;  supra,  n.  [e] ;  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.  B.)  Dighton's  case,  Raym.  188.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  291.  S.  C.  1 
Vent.  77,  82.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  461.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  641,  656.  (Blagrave's  case,  2  Sid. 
49,  72,  was  not  argued).  "Warren's  case,  Cro.  Jac.  540.  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Free- 
bold). 

{/)  Ante,  p.  191,  192,  n.  (c).  R.  t.  Axbridge  (Mayor),  1  Cowp.  523.  See  tit. 
"  Office"  (Restoration). 

{k)  Ante,  p.  192,  n.  {d)  ;  1  Sid.  14;  supra,  n.  (e) ;  1  Mod.  287.  Vide  1  Inst.  1. 
the  rule  in  Norfolk's  case,  39  lien.  6.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  99  a.  See  tit.  "  Office" 
(Restoration). 

{I)  10  Mod.  146,  supra.  Dighton's  case,  1  Vent.  82.  See  Co.  Litt.  110  ;  1  Lev. 
262;  Cro.  Car.  110.     See  post,  '■Office"  (Restoration  Return). 

(wi)  10  Mod.  146,  supra;  1  Sid.  33.     See  tit.  "  Custom,"  and  post,  tit.  "Return." 

(n)  Ante,  p.  176,  n.  (<).    Dighton's  case,  1  Vent.  77.    S.  C.  2  Keb.  641,  656.  S.  0. 


TREASURY;     LORDS     OF.  315 

admission  into  a  judicial  ofFice,  as  an  aldermanj  &c.,  wtose  office  concerns 
judicature,  there  cannot  be  a  removal  without  cause,  and  a  custom  so  to 
remove,  is  bad.(o)  A  return  that  a  mayor,  for  the  time  being,  may  elect 
a  town  clerk,  is  good,  which,  in  clFcct,  is  a  power  to  the  newly  elected 
mayor,  to  remove  at  his  pleasure  the  town  clerk  for  the  time  being. (p) 
But  if  the  power  be  to  choose  a  town  clerk,  with  a  proviso  that  he  may 
be  turned  out  at  will  and  pleasure,  yet  it  has  been  held,  that  he  cannot  be 
deprived  without  cause  and  summons. (5') 

.]  Records,  &c.,  Ddiocry. — The  writ  of  mandamus  will  be  granted 

to  command  a  town  clerk  to  deliver  to  his  successor  in  office  all  records, 
&c.,  for  they  concern  public  justice. (r) 

*TowN  Councillor  or  Councilman.]  See  titles  Councillor;  p^^^^r^ 
Office.  '-"-^^J 

Trademark.]     See  title  Corporation,  Tradtnr/ (Trade  Mark.) 

Trading  Corporation.]     See  title  Corporation,  Trading. 

Treasurer  of  County.]     See  titles  County  (Treasurer) ;   Office. 

Treasurer  of  Guardians  op  Poor.]  See  title  Guardians  of  Poor 
(Treasurer.) 

Treasuer  of  New  River.]    See  title  Neic  River  Water  (Treasurer.') 

Treasury,  Lords  of.]  Although  there  are  circumstances,  as  in  cases 
of  compensation, (.s)  under  which  a  mandamus  will  lie  against  the  lords  of 
the  treasury,  yet  their  lordships  in  their  official  capacities  have  been  erro- 
neously considered  to  be  within  the  general  jurisdiction  of  the  writ,  and 
a  much  misunderstood  instance  is  the  case  of  R.  v.  Treasury  Lords, (<)  in 

1  Sid.  461.  S.  0.  1  Lev.  291.  S.  C.  Raym.  188.  Warren's  case,  Cro.  Jac.  540.  R. 
V.  Campion,  1  Sid.  14,  15.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.)  R.  v.  Slatford,  5  Mod.  316, 
and  cases  there  cited.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (C.)  See  tit.  "Office"  (Freeliold, 
Restoration,  Returns). 

(0)  Ante,  p.  39,  n.  (^),  101,  n.  (:r),  and  infra,  n.  (q).  Awdley's  case,  Poph.  iVe, 
supra.  See  tits.  "  Alderman"  (Restoration,  Returns,)  "  Councilman"  (Restoration, 
Returns),  "  Office"  (Restoration.) 

{p)  Supra,  n.  [i).     R.  v.  Campion,  1  Sid.  14,  15.     See  tit.  "  Office,"  (Freehold.) 

{q)  Supra,  n.  {i).  Dighton's  case,  1  Vent.  82,  per  Twisden,  J.  But  see  tit.  "  Office" 
(Freehold,  Restoration). 

(r)  Nottingham  case,  1  Sid.  31,  where  see  the  legal  value  of  the  word  "Evidences;" 
also  cited  in  R.  v.  Wheeler,  Cas.  t.  Hard.,  by  Lee,  99.  S.  C.  Cunn.  155.  Bac.  Abr. 
tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  See  tits.  "  Attorney"  (Rolls),  "  Books,"  "  Corporation  Municipal" 
(Insignia,  &c.),  "County,"  "Manor"  (Rolls),  "Papers  Official,"  "Records." 

(s)  See  tit.  "Compensation"  (Office). 

\t)  4  A.  &  E.  286.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  589,  600,f  per  Ld.  Dcnman,  0.  J. ;  and  see 
6  N.  &  M.  508.f  Sec  also  6  N.  &  M.  520,f  where  the  Court  said  that  all  that  was 
settled  in  5  N.  &  M.  589, f  was  that  their  Lordships  ought  to  make  a  return,  and 
that  bej-ond  that  no  such  rule  of  law  was  laid  down.  See  R.  v.  Hornby,  or  The 
Bankers'  case,  11  Harg.  St.  Tr.  136.  S.  C.  14  How.  St.  Tr.  1.  S.  C.  5  Mod.  29.  See 
tits.  "  Crown,"  "  Customs,"  "  Manor"  (Royal  Manor),  "  Pension,"  "  Half-pay." 


31G  TAPriNO's     MANDAMUS. 

which  it  appeared  prima  f^icio,  that  a  government  pension  had  been  granted, 
that  funtl.s  applicable  to  its  payment  had  been  placed  by  Parliament  in 
the  liauds  of  the  lords  of  the  treasury,  as  public  ofl5cers  charged  ly  statute 
with  the  payment  of  such  persons;  that  such  lords  had  allotted  the  fund 
for  the  payment,  had  acknowledged  to  the  claimant  that  they  held  it  for 
his  use,  and  that  they  only  refused  to  pay  because  he  declined  to  take  it 
clogged  with  conditions,  which  they  had  no  right  to  impose ;  upon  these 
facts  to  which  no  answer  was  given,  the  Court  granted  the  mandamus 
against  their  lordships,  but  in  so  deciding  it  did  not  implicitly  infringe, 
but  on  the  contrary,  expressly  afl&rmed  the  doctrine,  that  a  mandamus  will 
not  lie  against  the  Crown  or  its  servants  as  such  -(u)  and  therefore,  that 
notwithstanding  a  legal  right  be  shewn  to  something  over  which  the  lords 
of  the  treasury  as  such,  have  control,  yet  a  mandamus  cannot  properly 
issue  to  them  in  respect  thereof.(jr;)  Thus,  a  mandamus  will  not  lie  to 
them  as  the  mere  public  depositories  of  money  to  command  the  payment 
by  them  of  a  sum  of  money  in  gross.  (_y) 

r*orn      * '^     Appeal. — If  the  lords  of  the  treasury  refuse  to  hear 

L  "  J  an  appeal  over  which  they  as  such  have  jurisdiction  by  act  of 
Parliament,  the  Court  may  and  will  issue  a  mandamus  to  command  them 
so  to  do,  but  if  they  do  decide  upon  it,  even  though  they  set  out  wrong 
reasons  for  their  judgment,  the  Court  cannot  review  it. (2)  So  if  their 
lordships  having  jurisdiction  mistake  in  point  of  law,  such  is  not  a  sujfi- 
cicnt  ground  to  warrant  a  mandamus. («)  But  if  their  lordships  assume 
jurisdiction  where  they  have  none,  the  Court  will  review  their  decision  in 
order  to  avoid  a  defect  of  justice,  but  will  not  grant  a  mandamus  to 
them.(i) 

.     Rule. — The  service  of  a  rule  upon  the  lords  of  the  treasury  is 

usually  effected  upon  their  solicitor,  (c) 

Trinity  House  Hall.]  Restoration. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the 
corporation  of  the  Trinity  House  Hall,  to  restore  to  the  brotherhood  of 
that  society((7)  one  improperly  removed  therefrom. 

[u)  In  re  Baron  de  Bode,  6  D.  792.  S.  C.  1  W.,  W.  &  H.  332,  confirmed  by  la 
re  Hand,  4  A.  &  E.  984.f  S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  508.t  In  re  Smith,  4  A.  &  E.  9T6.f  S. 
C.6  N.  &  M.  505.t  Ex  parte  Ricketts,  4  A.  &  E.  999.f  S.  C.  6  X.  &  M.  523.f  See 
tits.  "  Crown,"  "  Customs." 

{z)  Gidley  v.  Ld.  Palmerston,  3  Brod.  &  B.  275.f  S.  C.  T  B.  Moore,  91,  cited  in 
R.  V.  Treasury  (Commrs.),  G  N.  &  M.  513.f 

[y)  In  re  Baron  de  Bode,  6  D.  ^76.  S.  C.  1  W.,  &  H.  332.  See  tits.  "  Crown," 
"Customs,"  "Manor"  (Royal  Manor). 

(z)  R.  V.  Treasury  (Lords),  2  P.  &  D.  502.  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Com- 
pensation" (Office),  "  Courts  Inferior"  (Review  of  Judgment),  "  Quarter  Sessions" 
(Review,  Judgment),  and  ante,  p.  230,  n.  (i). 

{a)  Ex  parte  Pratt,  2  N.  &  P.  102,  cited  in  R.  v.  Treasury  Lords,  2  P.  &  D.  503. 
See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Hearing). 

{b)  R.  v.  Poole  (Mayor),  3  N.  &  P.  119.  S.  C.  T  A.  &  E.  T30,t  cited  in  R.  v. 
Treasury  (Lords),  2  P.  &  D.  503. 

(c)  R.  V.  Treasury  (Lords),  4  A.  &  E.  97G.f  S.  C.  6  N.  k  M.  505.f  See  post, 
tit.  "Rule"  (Service). 

('/)  Ante,  p.  12.  Bagwell  v.  Jobson,  1  Barn.  144.  See  tits.  "Company,"  "Cutlers' 
Company,"  "Franchise,"  "Freedom"  (Company),  "Office"  (Restoration). 


UNIVERSITY.  317 

Trust.]  The  Court  will  not  interfere  in  tlie  case  of  a  trust  or  otlicr 
mere  equitable  rijht,  for  tlic  writ  of  mandamus  is  only  a  legal  remedy  for 
a  leo-al  right  where  there  is  no  other  specific  legal  remedy. (c) 

Trustees.]  The  writ  lies  to  command  the  holding  of  a  meeting  of  the 
trustees  appointed  by  a  parish  act,  for  the  purpose  of  swearing  in  and 
admitting  one  elected  trustee,  (ee)  So,  it  lies  to  command  parish  trustees 
to  admit  their  accounts  in  pursuance  of  a  local  act.(/) 

Turkey  Company.]     See  titles  ComjKin//;  Freedom  {Company.') 

Turnpike  Trustees.]     See  tit.  Ehjliimy  {Toll-gates;   Tolls.) 

Umpire.]     See  titles  Arlitrator ;  Award;  Savings'  Banh. 

Undermaster  of  School.]  See  titles  College  {Master) ;  School  (  Un- 
dermaster ;    University. 

*University.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows: —  [*267] 


University. 

Duty,  &c.       -  -  -  -  26Y 

Member  .  -  -  -  267 

Admission  _  .  -  267 

Academical  Degrees  -  -  267 

Admissioa  _  _  -  267 

Restoration  -  -  -  267 

Returns  -  -  -  268 


University. 

Regius  Professor    -  -  -  268 

Appointment  -  -  268 

Higli  Steward         -  -  -  268 

Appointment  -  -  268 

Scholar  -         -  -  -  268 

Removal  -  -  -  268 

Restoration     -  -  -  269 


.]     Duty,  &c. — The  writ  lies  to  command  an  University  to  give 

efPect  to  the  regular  corporate  act  of  the  whole  body,  for  in  such  case  the 
visitor  has  no  jurisdiction,  and  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  always  inter- 
fered, (y) 

.]  Member;  Admission. — No  instance  has  occurred  of  a  man- 
damus having  been  granted  to  the  Universities  to  command  the  admissii  n 
of  a  person  as  a  member,  in  order  that  he  might  proceed  to  take  his 
degrees,  as  a  doctor's  degree,  and  thereby  be  enabled  to  exercise  the  pro- 
fession of  an  advocate  in  the  Ecclesiastical  Courts.  (A) 

(e)  Ante,  p.  9,  22,  64,  n.  {y).  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbishop),  15  East,  149,  150, 
per  Ellcnborough,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Stafford  (Marq.),  3  T.  R.  646,  per  Kenyon,  C.  J.  See 
tits.  "Charity,"  "Dissenters,"  "Institutions"  (Private),  "Legacy,"  "Trustees." 

{ee)  II.  V.  Kensington,  2  B.  &  Ad.  740.f  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Church- 
warden" (Election). 

(/)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  3  A.  &  E.  535-1  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222.t  R-  v.  St.  Pancras, 
6  A.  &  E.  314.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  507  ;t  6  A.  &  E.  321,t  a.  See  tits.  "Accounts," 
"Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Auditor,"  "  Parish." 

ig)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (U.),  Burr.  1647.  R.  v.  Dr.  Bland,  cited  in  Burr.  1663.  S. 
C.  2  Burn's  Eccl.  Law,  117,  8th  edit.  R.  v.  Bedford  (Mayor),  T.  T.,  14  and  15 
Geo.  2.  See  R.v.  Kendall,  1  Q.  B.  378,t  n.  (c).  See  tits.  "  College"  (Seal),  "Seal," 
"Visitor."  ^    X      -o 

(h)  Ante,  p.  12—15.  R.  v.  Lincoln's  Inn,  7  D.  &  R.  364,t  per  Abbott,  C.  J.  K. 
V.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  8  East,  213,  cited  in  7  D.  &  R.  SGS.f     See  tits.  "Advo- 


318  tatping's    mandamus. 

."]     Academical  degi'ecs  ;  Admission. — The  ■writ  lies  to  command 


the  admission  of  one  duly  qualified  to  academical  degrees,  for  they  are 
blended  ^vith  a  temporal  right.(i!')  Thus  the  writ  has  been  granted  to 
admit  one  duly  entitled  to  the  academical  degrees  of  master  of  arts,  &c.(y) 
But  in  all  the  cases  upon  this  subject,  it  does  not  appear  that  "  visitor" 
was  returned. (A;) 

.]     Restoration. — The  writ  has  also  for  the   same  reason,  been 

granted  to  restore  to  academical  degrees,  one  wrongfully  deprived  or  sus- 
pended, as  "Bachelor  of  Arts,''  "  Master  of  Arts,"  "  Doctors  of  Divinity," 
r*9rQ-|  &c.(/)  But  it  *has  been  held,  that  the  writ  does  not  lie  to  com- 
mand the  Vice  Chancellor  of  the  University  to  restore  to  the  fran- 
chises of  a  resident  Master  of  Arts  of  such  University. («i) 

.]     Returns. — It  seems  that  if  there  be  a  return  that  there  is  a 

visitor,  a  peremptory  mandamus  will  not  be  granted,  either  to  admit  or 
to  restore  to  academical  dcgrecs,(n)  the  Court  will  however  require  a  re- 
turn, that  there  is  such  visitor,  and  not  supersede  the  mandamus  upon 
affidavits(o)  of  the  fact. 

A  return  that  the  prosecutor  has  been  degraded  for  having  spoken  con- 
temptous  words  of  the  Vice  Chancellor,  and  the  process  of  his  Court  is  ill, 
and  a  peremptory  mandamus  will  be  awarded;  but  contra  if  the  words  are 
contemptously  spoken  of  the  University. (p)  So  if  a  return  allege  a  sus- 
pension or  degradation,  and  do  not  state  that  the  party  so  suspended,  &c., 
was  summoned  to  attend  the  proceedings  or  made  any  defence  thereto,  it 
will  be  defective  in  substance,  (j) 

cate  of  Doctors'  Commons,"  "College"  (Member,  Admission),  "Inn  of  Court"  (Ad- 
mission), "Physicians'  College." 

(?)  Ante,  p.  12  ;  3  Bl.  Com.  110.  Dr.  Bentley's  case,  T.,  9  Geo.  I ;  8  Mod.  148, 
151,  cited  in  R.  v.  London  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  13.  Baketon's  case,  cited  in  Patrick's 
case,  Ra3-m.  109.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  65.  This  writ  was  directed  to  the  Chancellors  and 
Masters  of  the  University  of,  &c.,  and  tested  thus  :  "  Teste  Eege,  28  die  Martii,  al 
York,"  5  E.  2,  M.  8  ;  Riley,  533,  534.  But  see  tits.  "Dignity,"  "Inn  of  Court," 
"Phj'sicians'  College." 

(./)  Riley's  Plac.  Par.  533,  cited  in  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  66.     S.  C.  Raym.  101. 

(A-)  See  infra,  as  to  restoration  to  degrees,  and  the  visitor's  power.  See  tits. 
"  College,"  "  Dignity,"  "  Inn  of  Court,"  "  Phvsicians'  College,"  "  Visitor." 

(/)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  9  Geo.  1 ;  8  Mod.  148,  151.  S.  C.  Stra. 
557.  S.  C.  Fortesc.  202.  S.  C.  Andr.  176.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1334;  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."  (A.)  See  also  R.  v.  St.  Catherine's  Hall,  4  T.  R.  236.  R.  v.  Lincoln's 
Inn,  4  B.  &  C.  857  ;  Ld.  Raym.  1564  ;  Esp.  Dig.  677.  Philips  v.  Bury,  2  T.  R.  346. 
Dr.  Bentley's  case,  8  Mod.  148,  cited  in  D.  Walker's  case,  Gas.  t.  Hard.  215,  216, 
218.  It  did  not  appear  that  there  was  a  visitor;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  But  see 
post,  tit.  "Visitor." 

(m)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (U.),  6  T.  R.  89. 

(n)  Ante,  p.  10.  Vide  Show.  74;  3  Mod.  265;  1  Sid.  71.  S.  C.  1  Mod.  82,  S. 
G.  2  Lev.  15.  S.  G.  1  Lev.  23;  Garth.  168;  Raym.  31,  102  ;  2  Jones,  175;  and 
see  8  Mod.  160,  supra.     See  tits.  "College,"  "Visitor." 

(o)  R.  v.  AVhalley,  Stra.  1139,  and  see  tit.  "Visitor,"  and  post,  tit.  "Superse- 
deas." 

[p)  Ante,  p.  40,  n.  (n) ;  8  Mod.  148,  supra,  and  cases  there  cited.  See  tit. 
"  Office"  (Restoration  Returns). 

{q)  Stra.  557,  supra.  Sec  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration  Return),  and  post,  tit.  "Re- 
turn." 


UNIVERSITY.  319 

,]     Regius  Professor  ;  Aj^jyointment. — The  writ  lies  to  command 

an  University  to  proceed  to  the  choice  of  aregius  professor.(/-) 

.]     Hi(jh  Steicard  Appointment. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the 

Vice  Chancellor  of  an  University  to  hold  a  congregation  to  receive  the 
declaration  of  the  proctors,  in  respect  to  a  majority,  to  the  proctors  to 
declare  how  such  majority  stood,  and  to  the  keepers  of  the  common  seal 
of  the  University,  to  set  it  to  the  appointment  of  high  steward,  because 
there  is  a  salary  annexed  to  the  office,  and  no  other  specific  legal 
remedy,  (s) 

.]     Sclwlar  ;  Removal. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to  remove  a 

scholar  from  the  University(<)  as  for  being  a  Lollard. (?r)  Thus,  one  Ro- 
bert Lichdale,  a  scholar  at  Oxford,  who  maintained  Lollardy  having  been 
complained  of,  and  the  University  having  been  remiss  in  punishing  him, 
(the  bishop  not  having  jurisdiction  though  in  a  cause  of  heresy),  the  king 
directed  his  writ  of  mandamus  to  the  Chancellor  of  the  University,  and 
thereby  commanded  him  to  remove  Lichdale;  the  phraseology  of  the  writ 
was  very  *remarkable,  inasmuch  as  it  alleged  that  this  Lichdale  r^nnq-i 
did  "publieare,  communicare  and  docere  opiniones  nefarias,  ac 
conclusiones  detestabiles  in  Fidei  Catholicse  loesionem,  et  Universitatis 
prasdictse  subversionem,  nisi  brachio  regise  majestatis  citius  resistatur," 
and  then  commanded  that  they  should  examine  "  per  inquisitionom  vel  alio 
modo  legitirao  si  ipsum  talem  inveniri  contigerit.''(i') 

.]     Restoration. — So  the  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  the 

restoration  of  a  scholar  of  the  University  of  Cambridge.  Thus,  such  Uni- 
versity temp.  5  Edw.  2,  excluded  certain  scholars  who  were  of  the  order 
of  the  Predicants,  and  denied  them  any  privilege  of  the  University,  and 
thereupon  these  scholars  applied  themselves  to  the  king,  and  obtained  a 
mandamus  directed  to  the  Chancellor,  regentibus  et  non  regentibus  of  the 
University,  commanding  them  to  allow  the  complainants  the  privileges  by 
them  challenged. (w) 

(r)  Ante,  p.  12;  1  Barn.  B.  R.  82,  M.,  Y  Geo.  1,  cited  in  Dr.  Walker's  case,  Cas. 
t.  Hard.  215,  218.  It  did  not,  however,  appear  tliat  there  was  a  visitor.  See  tits. 
"College"  (Master),  "School"  (Master). 

(s)  Ante,  p.  18—27.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  1  W.  Blac.  546.  S.  C.  Burr.  1647, 
1648;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.)  See  tits.  "Office"  (Fees,  &c.),  "Overseers" 
(Election),  "Steward"  (High).  (The  rule  in  such  cases  usually  requires  notice 
thereof  to  be  given  to  the  University,  and  to  any  person,  the  validity  of  whose  vote 
may  be  disputed).  See  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  2  Show.  74,  n.  [d),  3rd  edit. ;  Vide  Vin. 
Abr.  tit.  "Officer"  (0.);  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  See  tits.  "College"  (Seal), 
"Charity,"  "Seal." 

[t)  Riley's  Plac.  Pari.  601,  cited  in  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  QQ.  See  tits.  "College" 
(Fellows,  Expulsion),  "Visitor." 

(u)  Ril.  Plac.  Pari.  60.     R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Skin.  547. 

\v)  Patrick's  case,  Raym.  110  ;  50  Ed.  3,  pars.  2,  memb.  8.  John  Wolverton's 
case.  So  in  the  19  Rich.  2,  a  writ  was  directed  to  the  Chancellor  of  Oxford  to 
expel  Lollards.  See  Ryley's  Plac.  Parliam.  601,  cited  in  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4 
Mod.  240. 

(w)  Co.  2nd  Inst.  640 ;  Riley,  601 ;  Claus.  19,  R.  2,  M.  24.  Patrick's  case,  Raym. 
110.  This,  however,  was  a  Parliamentary  writ,  the  jurisdiction  of  which  was  un- 
defined, and  it  does  not  appear  that  "  Visitor"  was  returned.  Sec  ante,  p.  3,  n.  (/), 
251,  n.  (z). 


320  tapping's   mandamus. 

So  writs  of  mandamus  have  gone  (out  of  Chancery)  to  restore  a  Banni- 
tus  of  the  University. (a;)  But  it  was  said  by  Windham,  C.  J.  in  a  simi- 
lar case,  (y)  that  he  had  seen  a  writ  to  restore  a  man  banished  the  Uni- 
versity, but  that  it  issued  in  irregular  times,  and  that  it  was  not  to  be 
followed,  and  that  it  (together  with  others  of  the  same  class)  was  auctori- 
tate  Parliamenti,  by  petition  presented  to  the  king  and  Parliament,  from 
which  the  Ilouse  of  Lords  was  then  a  distinct  Court  of  judicature,  and 
that  to  such  petitions  the  king  gave  present  answers  unica  voce  without 
an  act  of  Parliament. (^;) 

So  a  writ  to  restore,  &c.,  has  been  granted  to  a  scholar,  who  had  been 
suspended  by  the  Vice  Chancellor,  upon  which  restitution  was  granted. (a) 
But  at  this  day  it  is  apprehended,  that  a  mandamus  would  not  be  granted 
to  restore  one,  against  whom  either  mere  banishment  from  the  university 
has  been  pronounced,  or  has  been  suspended. (t) 

The  writ  lies,  however,  to  restore  one  to  a  place  in  a  University,  if  there 
be  no  visitor(c)  having  jurisdiction. 

Usher  of  School.]     See  titles  College  {Master) ;  ScJiool  {Usher). 

Verger  of  St.  Paul's.]  Restoration. — The  writ  has  been  granted 
to  command  restoration  to  the  oflice  of  verger  of  St.  Paul's. (f/) 

[*270]     *Vestry.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 


Vestry. 

Vestry. 

To  hold  Vestry 

- 

-  2'70 

Select Vestrj-m en        -            -  271 

Books,  &c. 

- 

-  270 

Appointment        -             -  271 

Delivery 

- 

-  270 

Vestry  Clerk        .            _            .  271 

Select  Vestry. 

Admission       -            -             _  271 

Formation. 

- 

-  270 

.]      To  hold 

Vestry.- 

—Where 

the  inhabitants  at  large  of  a  parish, 

or  a  considerable  portion  of  them,  wish  to  have  a  vestry  called,  for  a  proper 
and  legitimate  purpose,  and  a  refusal  is  made  so  to  do,  both  on  the  part  of 
the  minister  and  churchwardens,  it  seems  the  Court  of  B.  K.  will,  by  man- 
damus, not  to  the  inhabitants,  but  to  the  churchwardens,  command  them 
to  summon  the  inhabitants  to  the  vestry,  in  order  that  the  acts  which  the 
inhabitants  wish,  shall  be  done.(e)    Thus  the  writ  lies  to  command  church- 

{x\  Ante,  p.  2.     R.  v.  Applcford,  3  Keb.  8G3,  864.     See  tit.  "  College." 

(?/)  2  Keb.  167,  and  ante,  p.  251,  n.  (z). 

(z)  2  Keb.  167,  per  Windham,  J.     See  ante,  p.  3,  n.  {I),  251,  n.  (z). 

(a)  50  Ed.  3,  merab.  6 ;  Clo.  Roll.,  and  2  Richd.  2  ;  and  see  2  Keb.  863,  864,  su- 
pra.    See  tit.  "  Office"  (Suspension). 

{h)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (U.),  6  T.  R.  89.     See  tits.  "  College"  (Visitor),  "Visitor." 

(c)  Ante,  p.  10.  See  R.  t.  St.  Catherine's  Hall,  4  T.  R.  235,  citing  Dr.  Withring- 
ton's  case,  1  Keb.  234,  &c.     See  tit.  "  Visitor." 

id)  Ante,  p.  12,  T.,  22  Geo.  3.  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  204.  See  tit.  "Office  "  (Public), 
(Si)iritual  Officer). 

(c)  R.  V.  Stoke  Damerel  (Minister),  1  N.  &  P.  58.f  per  Ld.  Denman,  C.  J.     S.  C. 


VESTRY.  321 

■wardens  to  assemble  parishioners  in  the  manner  required  by  stat.  1  &  2 
Wm.  4,  c.  60,  in  order  to  elect  within  a  reasonable  time,  a  vestry  and 
auditors  of  parish  accounts,  &c. ;(/)  or  for  any  other  lawful  purpose. (</) 
So  the  writ  lies  to  command  churchwardens  to  assemble  parishioners,  for 
the  purpose  of  taking  a  poll  upon  a  motion  put  to  the  vote  by  a  shew  of 
hands,  at  a  general  meeting  of  the  inhabitants.  But  where  a  vestry,  hav- 
ing by  a  shew  of  hands  passed  a  resolution,  directing  a  misapplication  of 
some  charitable  funds,  and  a  poll  having  been  demanded  of  the  person 
presiding  at  the  vestry,  and  not  granted ;  the  Court  refused  a  rule  for  a 
mandamus  to  command  such  person  to  grant  a  poll,  because  the  object  of 
the  vote  was,  in  fact,  a  breach  of  trust,  and  therefore  illegal.  (7i) 

.]  Books  ;  Delivery. — The  writ  has  been  held  not  to  lie  to  com- 
mand the  delivery  up  to  the  vestry  clerk  of  the  vestry  books ;  as  he  may 
bring  detinvie  or  trover  for  them,  unless  they  be  claimed  by  the  defendant 
on  the  ground  of  his  supposed  election  to  the  same  office. (i) 

.]     Select   Vestry;    Formation. — The  writ  lies  to   command 

churchwardens  and  overseers  of  the  poor  to  give  notice  of  a  vestry  meet- 
ing for  the  purpose  of  considering  the  propriety  of  establishing  a  select 
vestry  for  the  concerns  of  the  poor,  pursuant  to  stat.  59  Geo.  3,  c.  12,  and 
of  nominating  and  *electing  the  members  thereof,  if  it  should  ap-  j-^j,,-,-,-, 
pear  to  the  vestry  so  summoned,  that  such  select  vestry  ought  to 
be  established ;  but  a  return  that  there  was,  by  custom,  an  ancient  vestry 
in  the  parish,  which  had  from  time  immemorial  consulted  and  deliberated 
on  parochial  matters,  and  acted  as '  a  select  vestry  for  the  concerns  of  the 
poor,  and  that  they  had  immemorially  been  accustomed  to  perform  the 
duties  imposed  on  select  vestries  by  the  statute,  has  been  held  to  be  bad, 
because  the  statute  imposes  some  duties  as  the  management  of  money 
raised  by  poor  rates,  and  the  making  orders  for  the  government  of  over- 
seers, which  could  not  have  existed  before  the  stat.  43  Eliz.  c.  2.(ji') 

.]      Vestrymen,  Select;  Appointment. — The  writ  lies  to  command 

justices  to  appoint,  by  writing,  &c.,  certain  persons  elected  by  the  inhabi- 
tants under  their  parish  act,  as  select  vestrymen.  (Z;) 

5  A.  &  E.  584.-J-  See  tits.  "  Churchwarden"  (Election),  "Corporation  Ministerial" 
(Duties,  &c.),  "Overseers"  (election),  "Parish"  (Parish  Meeting). 

(/)  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  1  A.  &  E.  SO.f  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  11  A.  &  E.  15,  27,t  n. 
(a),  where  see  form  of  rule.     See  tits.  "  Churchwardens"  (Election),  "  Parish." 

[g]  Ante,  p.  9.     R.  v.  Birmingham  (Rector),  7  A.  &  E.  258-1     R.  v.  D.  Ogly,  12 

A.  &  E.  139.t  R.  V.  Stoke  Damercl  (Minister),  5  A.  &  E.  589.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
CG.f  R.  V.  Clerkenwell  Parish,  1  A.  &  E.  SlT.f  See  tits.  "  Guardians  of  Poor," 
"  Sexton." 

(A)  Ante,  p.  IG.  R.  t.  St.  Saviour's  (Churchwardens),  4  A.  &  E.  380. f  See  tits. 
"Charity,"  "Rate." 

{i.)  Anon.,  2  Chit.,  255.1  See  tits.  "Accounts,"  "Blacksmiths'  Company," 
"Books,"  "Corporation  Municipal"  (Books,  &c.),  "Manor"  (Rolls,  &c.),  "Paupers, 
Official,"  "Parish"  (Books,  &c.),  "Records." 

(y)  Ante,  p.  222,  n.  {w).  R.  v.  St.  Bartholomew  (Churchwardens),  2  B.  &  Ad. 
506.f  R.  V.  Woodman,  4  B.  &  A.  507.f  R.  v.  St.  Martin's  Parish,  3  B.  &  Ad.  DOT.f 
See  tits.  "  Overseers,"  "  Parish." 

(/c)  Ante,  p.  12.     R.  v.  Adams,  2  A.  &  E.  409.f     R.  v.  St.  Mary,  Kensington,  2 

B.  &  xid.  740,f  and  cases  there  cited.  R.  v.  Kent,  (J.),  4  N.  &  M.  299.f  See  tits. 
"  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Overseers,"  "  Quarter  Sessions." 

May,  1852.— 21 


322  tapping's    mandamus. 

.]     Vkstuy  Clerk;  Admission. — A  mandamus  will  not  lie  to 


admit  to  the  office  of  vestry  clerk.  There  has  never  been  hut  one  sup- 
posed instance  of  such  a  mandamus,  and  of  that  there  exists  no  satisfac- 
tory account. (?)  The  office  is  neither  fixed  nor  permanent,  but  depends 
altogether  on  the  will  of  the  inhabitants,  who  may  elect  a  diflTcrent  clerk 
at  each  vestry.  It  has  not  any  salary  annexed,  and  the  mere  fact  that 
the  fees  are  to  be  paid  out  of  the  poor  rates,  shews  there  can  bo  no 
prescriptive  right  to  it;  in  a  word  it  is  an  employment  merely  of  a 
private  nature,  and  he  who  fulfis  it,  is  the  servant  of  a  mere  fugitive 
body.(»i) 

Vicar.]  Presentation. — The  writ  lies  to  command  the  master  of  a 
private  corporation  to  affix  the  corporate  seal  to  a  deed  of  presentation  to 
a  vicarage ;(n)  in  such  a  case  the  writ  maybe  directed  to  the  master 
alone,  (o) 

Vice  Master.]  See  titles  CoUe/jc  (^Vice  Master);  School;  Uni- 
versity. 

Vice  Chancellor.]  See  titles  College  [Fellows,  Expulsiori);  Univer- 
sity. 

ViLL,  Clerk  of.]  Restoration. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to  com- 
mand restoration  to  the  place  of  clerk  of  a  vill.Qy) 

r*9-o-i  ^Visitation.]  The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  the  provid- 
*-  "  ing  of  necessaries  upon  a  visitation,  because  there  is  another  spe- 
cific legal  remedy,  namely,  by  suing  for  procurations.  (§) 

Visitor.]  It  appears  by  a  review  of  the  older  cases  of  authority, 
which  have  reference  to  applications  to  the  Court  of  B.  R.,  for  writs  of 
mandamus  to  those  institutions,  properly  subjected  to  visitatorial  juris- 
diction, that  the  questions  therein  commonly  raised  and  discussed,  have 
been,  whether  there  be  a  visitor  ?  and  if  so,  whether  he  be  capable  of 

{I)  Per  Ld.  Kenyon,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Croydon  (Churchwardens),  5  T.  R.  714:  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C. 

(m)  See  R.  v.  Croydon  (Churchwardens),  5  T.  R.  714.  R.  v.  St.  Nicholas 
(Guardians),  4  M.  &  S.  324.  See  tits.  "  Guardians  "  (Treasurer),  "  Office"  (Free- 
hold). 

in)  R.  r.  Kendall,  4  P.  &  D.  602,  where  see  form  of  writ.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  SCG.f 
S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  137,  Q.  B.,  also  cited  in  R.  v.  Ottery,  St.  Mary,  3  G.  &  D.  383. 
S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  157,  lGO,f  per  Ld.  Denman,  C.  J.  Sec  tit.  "  College"  (Seal),  "  Hospi- 
tal" (Seal),  '=  Parson,"  "  Seal." 

(o)  4  P.  k  D.  003.     S.  C.   1  Q.  B.  3GG,t  supra.     Sec  post,  "  "Writ"  (Direction). 

{p)  19  Jac,  cited  in  The  Protector  v.  Craford,  Sty.  457.     See  tit.  "  Office." 

{q)  Ante,  p.  18—27,  cited  in  R.  v.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  542.  See  tits.  "  Bishop," 
"  Chrism,"  "  Sacrament." 


VISITOR.  323 

visitin"-?(r)  as  these  questions  were  dccidecl,  so  the  writ  was  either 
"•ranted  or  refused.  Such  questions  are  also,  for  the  same  reasons,  at  this 
day  of  the  last  importance,  and  must  be  satisfactoril}^  resolved  before  an 
application  can  be  successfully  made  to  the  Court  of  E.  R.  for  its  inter- 
ference as  to  the  ordinary  concerns  of  such  institutions ;  because  with  any 
matter  properly  subject  to  visitatorial  jurisdiction,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  can- 
not intermeddle. (s) 

As  to  the  question,  who  is  visitor?  modern  decisions  show  that  in  tl  e 
case  of  a  private  eleemosynary  lay  foundation,  if  no  special  visitor  be 
appointed  by  the  founder ;  the  right  of  visitation  in  default  of  his  heirs, 
devolves  upon  the  king,  to  be  exercised  by  the  great  seal;(/)  so  that  there 
necessarily  must  be  one  upon  such  a  foundation,  who  has  the  general  right 
to  visit  in  general  cases. («)  Also  other  corporations,  which  have  visitors, 
in  general  have  them  either  by  the  appointment  of  the  founder,  or  of  the 
law;  if  a  lay  one,  the  founder  or  his  heirs ;(«)  if  an  ecclesiastical  one,(M;) 
and  no  visitor  have  been  appointed,  the  bishop  of  the  diocese  is,  ex  officio, 
visitor,  and  therefore  it  is  that  a  mandamus  has  never  been  moved  for  an 
abbot  nor  for  a  prior. (x) 

On  the  other  hand,  all  institutions,  either  not  the  subjects  of  visitato- 
rial authority  ;(_y)  or  where  such  authority  is  in  the  nature  of  a  claim  of 
cognizance,  which  does  not  exclude  the  ordinary  constitutional  method  of 
obtaining  justice,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  jurisdiction  to  interfere,  by  writ 
of  mandamus,  provided  a  specific  legal  remedy  for  the  subject-matter,  do 
not  exist. (2).  So  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  also  jurisdiction,  where  the  visi- 
tatorial *power  is  either  wholly  extinct  or  suspended  ;  thus  a  rule  r^oTgi 
for  a  writ  of  mandamus  has  been  granted  to  command  a  bishop, 
who  was  also  warden  of  Manchester  College,  to  admit  a  chaplain,  upon 
the  ground  that  as  the  visitatorial  power  was  suspended,  so  the  remedy 
was  in  the  court  of  B.  R.,  in  order  to  provent  a  failure  of  justice. (ct) 

If,  however,  as  before  stated,  there  be  a  visitor  to  whom  the  party 
grieved  may  appeal,  such  a  fact  will  constitute  a  good  return ;  for  the 

(/•)  5  Mod.  404.  Patrick's  case,  13  &  14  0.  2.  S.  0.  Raym.  101.  S.  C.  1  Lev. 
65.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  34G.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  289.  S.  C.  2  Kcb.  05,  104,  259.  R.  v.  Allsop, 
2  Show.  ITO. 

(s)  See  ante,  p.  10,  n.  (h),  and  post,  p.  274,  u.  (/").     See  tit.  "  Collej^e  (Visitor). 

(0  R.  V.  St,  Catherine's  Hall,  4  T.  R.  233,     R  y.  Allsop,  2  Show.  170. 

{u)  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  Barn.  52. 

(y)  3  Mod.  334.  Parkinson's  case,  1  Show.  74,  and  n,  (c) ;  4  T.  R.  233  ;  see  1 
W.  Blac.  89,  n.  (h).  See  tit.  "  College"  (Visitor),  and  the  several  subjects  of  this 
series. 

(w)  Parkinson's  case,  1  Show.  74 ;  1  W.  Blac.  89,  n.  (A).  Sec  tit.  "  Abbott," 
&c. 

[z]  R.  v.  Lee,  1  Show.  252,  per  Holt,  C.  J. ;  2  Roll.  Abr.  229.  R.  v.  Gray's  Inn, 
Doug.  353;  1  Mod.  12  ;  Burr.  567.  As  to  who  are  visitors,  see  5  Mod.  404  ;  Burr. 
1G47  ;  1  W.  Blac.  89,  n.  (A).     Sec  tits.  "Abbot,"  "  Prior,  &c." 

(y)  R.  V.  Alsop,  2  Show.  170,  and  2  Show.  170,  n.  {d),  3rd  edit.  R.  v.  Kend.all, 
1  Q.  B.  366.t     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  602.     Dr.  Withrington's  case.  1  Keb.  150. 

(z)  4  T.  R.  241  (a).     R.  v.  Whaley,  Stra.  1139.     See  ante,  p.  18—27. 

(a)  R.  V.  St.  Catherine's  Hall,  4  T.  R.  236,  238,  239,  citing  R.  v.  Chester  (Ep.), 
Stra.  797.     MS.  Ld.  Hard.  2  Geo.  2,  c.  29. 


324  tapping's    mandarius. 

Court  of  B.  R.  cannot  interfere,  by  mandamus,  concerning  anything  within 
the  visitatorial  authority,  it  being  a  species  of  forum  doracsticum,  having 
a  separate  and  exclusive  jurisdiction.  Thus  a  mandamus  vrill  not  lie  to 
restore  to  a  college  fellowship,  if  such  college  has  a  visitor,(/^)  for  he  is 
the  sole  and  proper  judge  of  the  private  laws  of  his  college,  and  it  is  his 
duty  to  determine  offences  against  them.  It  is  only  in  cases  where  the 
law  of  the  land  is  disobeyed,  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.  can  assume  jurisdic- 
tion, notwithstanding  the  visitor;  in  some  of  which  cases,  namely,  those 
that  are  of  a  public  nature,  it  may  be  that  the  proper  course  of  proceed- 
ing is  by  writ  of  mandamus ;('•)  but  with  visitatorial  questions,  they  being 
purely  of  private  and  domestic  relations,  the  public  is  not  concerned,  and 
with  them  the  Court  of  B.  R.  has  always  inclined  not  to  intermeddle. (fZ) 
Indeed  so  desirous  is  such  Court  not  to  invade  the  jurisdiction  of  the  visi- 
tor,  that  it  will  refuse  to  try,  upon  ^affidavits,  whether  or  not  there 
I-  -^  be  a  visitor  ?  but  insist  upon  a  return  in  order  that  the  other  party 
may  have  an  opportunity  to  right  himself.(e)  The  rule  is,  that  if  it  do  not 
appear,  whether  there  be  a  visitor  or  not  ?  or,  whether  or  not  he  have  autho- 
rity ?  the  Court  will  grant  a  rule  to  shew  cause ;  but  that  if  it  should 
clearly  appear  that  there  is  a  visitor  having  jurisdiction,  the  Court  will  not 
intrude  upon  his  jurisdiction. (/) 

(6)  Ante,  p.  10.  Bull.  N.  P.  195.  See  tits.  "Blue  Coat  School,"  "  Canons," 
"  College"  (Fellow,  Restoration).  Parkinson's  case,  1  Show.  74.  S.  C.  Carth.  92  ; 
Carth.  168.  S.  G.  2  Show.  170.  S.  C.  Comb.  143.  Usher's  case,  5  Mod.  452.  R. 
V.  Chester,  (Ep.),  Stra.  797.  Philips  v.  Bury,  Skin.  454,  per  Ejre,  J.,  and  474,  per 
Gregory,  J.  See  R.  v.  Ely,  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  266.  S.  C.  1  W.  IJlac.  52,  58.  R.  v. 
Chester,  (Ep.),  1  Barn.  52.  R.  v.  St.  Catherine's  Hall,  4  T.  R.  233.  R.  v.  Alsop, 
2  Show.  170.  R.  V.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233,  11,  14.  Dr.  Walker's  case,  Cas.  t.  Hard. 
217.  Indeed,  in  more  recent  cases  it  has  heen  said,  that  no  case  can  be  cited 
where  a  mandamus  has  been  granted  to  a  visitor.  R.  v.  Chester,  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac. 
23.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  206.  See  1  W.  Blac.  90,  n.  (h).  Parkinson's  case,  3  Mod.  265. 
S.  C.  Carth.  93.  See  Brideoak's  case,  1  W.  Blac.  25.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.) 
See  Anon.,  T.  T.,  13  Car.  2,  1  Keb.  101,  per  Twysden,  J. 

The  college  may  interpose  to  stop  a  mandamus  to  a  visitor.  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  1 
W.  Blac.  52.     S.  C.  1  Wils.  266.     See  tits.  '-Abbot,"  "College"  (Visitor),  "  Prior." 

As  to  when  the  Court  will  or  will  not  interfere  as  to  acts  done  hy  a  visitor ; 
Philips  V.  Bury,  2  T.  R.  346.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  106.  S.  C.  1  Show.  360.  S.  C.  Skin. 
454.  And  see  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Mod.  238  ;  Stra.  913.  Edenr.  Forster,  2 
P.  Wms.  325. 

As  to  the  extent  of  the  visitor's  jurisdiction  ;  Jenning's  case,  5  Mod.  422,  423,  n. 
[a).  R.  V.  Blythe,  5  Mod.  404.  Usher's  case.  Id.  452,  453.  Parkinson's  case,  Carth. 
93.  S.  C.  S^Mod.  265.  Trinity  Chapel  (Dean),  v.  Dublin  (Archbp.),  8  Mod.  183. 
R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  76.  S.  C.  Burr.  158.  S.  C.  1  Ld.  Ken.  441.  R.  v.  Ely 
(Ep.),  1  Wils.  266.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  52,  58.  Att.  Gen.  v.  Clare  Hall,  3  Atk.  662. 
R.  V.  St.  John's  Coll.,  5  Mod.  369,  n.  (b).     S.  C.  Comb.  238. 

(c)  R.  V.  Lincoln's  Inn,  4  B.  &  C.  857.f  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Mod.  241,  per  Holt, 
C.  J.     R.  V.  Dr.  Bland,  7  Mod.  356.     R.  v.  Lincoln  (Ep.),  2  T.  R.  338,  n. 

(d)  Ante,  p.  10.  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  52,  58,  S.  C.  1  Wils.  266.  R.  v. 
Chester  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  21.  S.  C,  1  Wils.  209.  Parkinson's  case,  2  Show.  170. 
S.  C.  Comb.  143.  Apleford's  case,  1  Mod.  82,  84.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  799,  861.  See 
tits.  "Cliaritv"  (Private.)  "Institutions,"  "Office"  (Public). 

(e)  R.  V.  Whaley,  Stra.  1139.  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Comb.  238.  Dr.  Withring- 
ton's  case,  1  Sid.  71;  1  Mod.  82,  Apleford's  case.     See  post,  tit.  "  Writ." 

(/)  R.  T.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  Wils.  209,  2G6.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  51.  Usher's  case,  5  Mod. 
452.  R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  2  T.  R.  337.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.)  And  see  Broadoak's 
case,  H.  12  Ann. ;  also  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  490,  492,  493,  for  forms  of  returns  of  visitors. 


VI  SI  TOE.  325 

If  a  visitor,  having  jurisdiction,  exceed  it,  or  assume  one  which  he  has 
not,  the  Court  of  B.  R.,  will  not  grant  a  mandamus,  although  advantage 
may  not  have  been  taken  in  time  of  prohibition  ;([/)  for  it  would  he  nuga- 
tory to  grant  a  mandamus  first,  and  a  prohibition  afterwards. (A) 

The  writ  docs  not  lie  to  command  a  visitor  to  exceed  his  jurisdiction  : 
thus,  it  has  been  refused,  to  command  him  to  exercise  his  visitatorial 
power  over  the  temporalities  of  a  prebend,  during  a  vacancy,  because,  in 
such  case,  an  action  at  law  is  the  proper  remedy. (/) 

A  visitor  cannot,  however,  properly  refuse  to  exercise  his  visitatorial 
power  or  jurisdiction;  and,  therefore  if  he  should  neglect  or  refuse  so  to 
do,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will,  by  mandamus,  command  him  to  exercise  such 
power.(y)  Thus  if  the  visitor  of  a  college  refuse  to  visit  it,  the  Court  of 
B.  R.  will  compel  him  so  to  do,  by  mandamus. (/i-)  So  it  will  command 
him  to  convene  parties  before  him,  and  hear  them,(?)  or  to  hear  and  deter- 
mine a  complaint. (m)  So  to  command  him,  if  the  appeal  be  to  him,  to 
hear  such  appeal,  and  give  some  judgment. (w) 

It  is,  however,  a  rule,  that  if  the  visitatorial  power  be  exercised,  the 
Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  interfere,  how  erroneously  soever  it  may  have 
been  exercised  ;(o)  for  there  is  no  precedent  of  a  writ  having  gone  to  com- 
mand *a  visitor  to  reverse  his  own  sentence  ;(p)  but  such  rule  _^^ 
does  not  extend  to  those  cases  where  the  decision  of  the  visitor  is  L  *^  J 
not  within  his  visitatorial  function. ($')  Nor  will  the  Court  of  B.  R.  in- 
quire, by  mandamus  into  the  validity  or  invalidity  of  the  decision  of  a 
visitor  ;  for  it  is  sufficient,  if  such  visitor  merely  state  in  his  return,  that  he 
has  decided.(r)     Thus,  where  a  mandamus  was  prayed  to  command  a 

(ff)  R.  T.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  22.  S.  0.  1  Wils.  206.  And  see  1  W  Blac. 
52.     S.  C.  1  WUs.  2G6. 

(/()Ante,  p.  15,  16;  1  W.  BLic.  58. 

(«)Ante,  p.  18 — 27.  R.  v.  Dunlmensem  (Ep.),  Burr.  567,  and  cases  there  cited. 
See  tit.  "  Prebendary." 

(y)  Ante,  p.  10,  12—15;  2  T.  R.  338,  n.  and  5  T.  R.  475,  infra,  n.  (o) ;  and  see 
Dr.  Walker's  case,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  219,  n.  (1).  R.  v.  Lincoln  (Ep.),  Tr.  25  Geo.  3,  B. 
R.,  cited  in  2  T.  R.  322.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  0.  2. 

(/c)  R.  V.  Chester  (Ei).),  1  Wils.  209.  S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  22.  R.  x.  Worcester  (Ep.), 
4  M.  &  S.  415.     R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  5  T.  R.  475.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  2. 

(l)  R.  V.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  129.     R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  2  T.  R.  336. 

(m)  2  T.  R.  338  ;  5  T.  R.  475 ;  2  T.  R.  338,  n.  (a),  supra.  See  tit.  "  Quarter  Ses- 
sions" (Justices). 

[n)  R.  V.  Lincoln  (Ep.),  2  T.  R.  338,  n.  R.  v.  Allsop,  2  Show.  170,  l7l.  R.  t. 
Surrey,  (J.),  2  Show.  74,  n.  [d),  3rd.  edit.  Philips  v.  Bury,  2  T.  R.  346.  S.  C.  4 
Mod.  106.  R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  5  T.  R.  475,  ace.  R.  t.  Chester  (Ep.),  Stra.  797,  recognised 
and  approved  by  Lord  Hardwicke  in  1  Ves.  471,  and  by  Buller  J.,  in  2  T.  R.  339  ;  2 
Geo.  2,  c.  29.  Parkinson's  case,  1  Show.  74,  n.  [a).  R.  v.  Worcester  (Ep.),  4  M.  &  S. 
415.  Leigh's  case,  3  Mod.  334.  Usher's  case,  5  Mod.  453.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.) 
(B.)  See  tits.  "Courts  Inferior"  (Appeal),  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

(o)  Supra,  n.  {J),  (m) ;  2  T.  R.  336 ;  2  T.  R.  337,  per  Buller,  J.  338,  n. ;  5  T.  R. 
475  ;  Cas  t.  Hard.  219,  n.  (1) ;  2  T.  R.  346.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  106,  supra.  R.  v.  St.  Ca- 
therine's Hall,  4  T.  R.  235. 

(p)R.  T.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  25.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  206;  2  T.  R.  337,  per  Buller, 
J.,  supra.  See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions." 

(^)  2  T.  R.  290;  Cas.  t.  Hard.  219,  n.  (1).  See  ante,  p.  274,  n.{ff),  {Ji),{')- 

(r)  R.  Y.  London  (Mayor),  9  B.  &  C.  21.f  S.  C.  5  M.  &  R.  36.  Philips  v.  Bury,  2 
T.  R.  351.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  106.  S.  C.  1  Show.  360.  S.  C.  Skin.  454.  And  see  2  T.  R. 
290,345.    See  tit   "Quarter  Sessions." 


326  tapping's    mandamus. 

visitor  to  receive,  hear,  and  determine  an  appeal,  the  Court  held,  that 
where  by  the  statutes  of  a  college,  a  visitor  is  appointed  who  is  to  inter- 
pret the  statutes,  and  an  appeal  is  lodged  with  him,  a  mandamus  will  lie 
to  command  him  to  hear  the  parties  and  form  some  judgment  though  he 
cannot  be  compelled  to  go  into  the  merits ;  for  it  is  sufficient,  if  he  decide 
the  appeal  came  too  latej(.s)  therefore,  when  the  visitor  has  determine 
the  matter,  no  mandamus  will  lie ;{()  for  as  he  has  for  the  most  part  an 
entire,  and  almost  an  arbitrary,  power,  so  there  can  be  no  appeal  from  him, 
or  other  remedy  against  his  judgment.(?<) 

It  is  also  a  rule  of  law  upon  this  subject,  that  a  mandamus  does  not 
lie  to  command  the  doing  of  that  wdiich  a  visitor  has  enjoined ;((.)  for  a 
mandamus  to  help  a  general  visitor  to  visit  his  college,  or  to  command  an 
inferior  officer  to  do  his  duty,  is  felo  do  se,  and  shall  be  quashed. (i<;) 

Vote.]  See  titles  Burgess  Roll;  Corporation  Municipal  [Dicties, 
(fee);  Councilman  (^Duties,  &c.);  Overseers  (Election);  Parish  ^Elec- 
tion.) 

Wages.]  Millers;  Weavers. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to  command 
the  county  justices,  together  with  the  sheriff  of  the  same  county,  pursu- 
ant to  stats.  16  Car.  1,  c.  4,  s.  2,  and  1  Jac.  1,  c.  6,  to  hear  and  deter- 
mine upon  the  application  of  certain  millers  or  weavers  of  the  said  county, 
and  to  limit,  rate,  and  appoint  the  wages  of  millers  and  weavers  in  the 
said  county  ;(a;)  but  as  a  discretion  is,  by  such  acts,  vested  in  the  justices, 
l-^..^^p-,  the  Court  will  not  *command  them  to  limit  the  rate  of  wages,  but 
merely  to  entertain  the  application. (y) 

Warden  of  College.]     See  titles  College  (Seal);  Visitor. 

Warrant.]  See  titles  Distress;  Quarter  Sessions  (^Justice,  War- 
rant). 

(s)  Ante,  p.  10,  supra,  n.  (r).  Usher's  case,  5  Mod.  454,  n.  (b).  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  .5 
T.  R.  475,  ace.  R.  v.  Lincoln  (Ep.),  T.  25  Geo.  3,  2  T.  R.  338.  Philips  v.  Burj,  2 
T.  R.  351.  And  see  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  9  B.  &  C.  25.f  R.  v.  "Worcester  (Ep.).  4 
M.  &  S.  415.  See  tit.  "  Quarter  Sessions." 

[i)  Apleford's  case,  1  Mod.  84,  per  Hale,  C.  J.,  cited  in  Philips  v.  Bury,  4  Mod. 
122.  S.  C.  2  T.  R.  351.  See  also  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Mod.  236,  and  9  B.  & 
C.  21.t 

(u)  Ante,  p.  2'73,  n.  (b).    R.  v.  Alsop,  2  Show.  ITO.  S.  C.  2  Jones,  1T5. 

(v)  Dr.  Walker's  case,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  211;  Andr.  178,  in  marg. ;  3  Bac.  Abr. 
529,  536,  3rd  edit.,  or  tit.  ".Man."  (B.),  S.  C.  See  tit.  "Courts  Inferior"  (Judg- 
ment, &c.) 

(w)  Cas.  t.  Hard.  211;  B.  R.  H.  212  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.)  See  post,  tit. 
"Writ"  (Form). 

(x)  R.  V.  Kent  (J.),  14  East,  395.  R.  v.  Cumberland  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  193.  R.  v. 
Hey  wood,  1  M.  &  S.  624.  See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Quarter  Sessions"  (Jus- 
tices). 

(y)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Canterbury  (Archbishop),  15  East,  126,  citing  14  East, 
395  ;  1  M.  &  S.  190.     See  tit.  "  Visitor." 


WIIITSTABLE,     ETC.  327 

Water-Bailiff.]     See  title  Severn,  Water  Bailiff  of. 

Water-House,  Masteu  of.]  The  writ  lies  not  for  tlie  master  of 
tlie  w:itcr-liousc  of  the  Lord  Mayor,  for  it  is  more  a  service  than  an 
office. (z) 

Waterworks.]  The  writ  lies  not  for  the  office  of  waterworks  in 
Loudon. («) 

Way.[  See  titles  Canal;  Footway;  Iliglncay ;  Liclosure ;  Railway ; 
Road. 

Weights  and  Measures.]  Inspector ;  Recoinpense. — The  writ  has 
been  granted  to  command  justices  of  the  peace  in  Quarter  Sessions,  to 
allow,  under  stat.  37  Geo.  3,  c.  143,  s.  1,  a  duly  appointed  examiner  of 
weights  and  measures,  a  reasonable  recompense  or  satisfaction  for  his 
trouble  in  the  execution  of  the  said  office. (?v) 

.]     .     Accounts.     The  writ  also  lies,  under  stats.   5  &  6 

Wm.  4,  c.  63,  and  5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  76,  to  command  an  investigation  of 
the  accounts  of  an  inspector  of  weights  and  measures,  and  to  make  an 
order  for  the  reasonable  remuneration  of  him  for  such  inspection. (c) 

Westminster,  High  Bailiff  of.]  Admission. — The  writ  lies  to 
command  the  dean  and  chapter  of  Westminster  to  admit  to  the  office  of 
high  bailiff  of  that  city,  because  there  the  bailiff  is  a  ministerial  officer, 
and  makes  returns  of  writs  in  his  own  name.(^/)  So,  if  the  high  steward 
of  Westminster  name  one  to  be  bailiff,  and  the  dean,  &c.  name  another, 
the  Court  will  grant  a  mandamus  to  the  appointee  of  the  high  steward, 
but  without  prejudice  to  the  dean,  &c.(c) 

*WniTSTABLE,  Freefishers,  &c.,  OF.]  Restoration. — The  p^..-,_»-, 
writ  lies  to  command  the  restoration  to  the  office  of  freeman  of  the  ^  "  -• 
Company  of  freefishers  and  Dredgers  of  Whitstable,  &c.,  if  improperly 
removed.  (/) 

(z)  Cited  in  Tie's  case,  1  Vent.  143.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.)  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"  Man."  C.     See  tit.  "  Office." 

(a)  Hurst's  case,  1  Keb.  554.     See  tit.  "Office"  (Public),  (Freehold). 

{}))  R.  v.  Devon  (.1.),  1  B.  &  A.  588.  See  tits.  "Coroner,"  "Quarter  Sessions" 
(Justices),  "  Salary." 

(c)  R.  v.  Hull  (Recorder),  3  N.  &  P.  595.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  C38.f  See  tits.  "  Ac- 
coiintsj"  "  Act  of  Parliament." 

{(l)  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Westrainst.  (Dean),  Comb.  244.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  281.  The 
former  report  says  that  the  franchise  is  in  the  Dean  and  Chapter,  but  quasre  if 
they  shall  answer  if  the  bailiff  be  insufficient.  Vide  Noy,  G9,  Dean,  &c.  of  St. 
Paul's  case.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  C.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Admission). 

(e)  Knipe  v.  Edwin,  4  Mod.  281.  S.  C.  Comb.  244.  Owen  v.  Saunders,  Ld. 
Raym.  159,  &c.     See  tits.  "Deputy  Officer,"  "Office." 

(/)  Ante,  p.  12.     R.  v.  Whitstable  (Freefishers),  7  East,  353.     S.  C.  3  Smith, 


328 


TAPPINGS     MANDAMUS. 


Prokate. 

Non  Compos 
Renunciation 

- 

-  27a 

-  279 

Stamp 
Will       - 

- 

-  279 

-  279 

Delivery 

- 

-  279 

Transmission 

- 

-  280 

Enrolment 

- 

-  280 

WiGAN,  Inn  Burgess  of.]  See  title  Burgess  {Inn  Burgess  of 
^Y!gnn.) 

AViLL.]     This  subject  is  arranged  as  follows  : — 

Probate. 

Grant  of         -        -  -  -  277 

Rule        -        -  -  -  278 

Form  of  Writ  -  -  278 

Returns  -  -  -  278 

Lis  pendens  -  -  278 

Insolvency  -  -  278 

Aj)praisemcnt  -  279 

Incapax  -  -  279 

.]     Probate,  Grant  of. — As  an  executor  has  a  temporal  interest 

in  a  probate,  and  without  it  cannot  sue,  &c.,  so  the  writ  of  mandamus  lies 
to  command  the  granting  of  it,  by  those  whose  duty  it  is  so  to  do,  as  the 
ordinary,(y)  or  the  Judge  of  the  Prerogative,(7i)  or  other  Ecclesiastical 
Court. (t)  So,  the  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  the  mayor  of  Oxford 
to  prove  a  will.(^) 

The  writ  will  also  be  granted  to  command  such  persons  or  inferior 
jurisdictions  to  proceed  to  prove  a  will,  &c.,  for  the  stat.  21  Hen.  8,  c.  5, 
enacts,  "  that  probate  is  to  be  granted  with  convenient  speed  without  any 
frustatory  delay." (7^-) 

rto^QT      * •     -^"^^- — Ii^  "Jiis  case,  the  rule  for  a  writ  to  command 

'-"'"-'  the  grant  of  probate,  was  made  absolute  in  the  first  instance,  on 
account  of  the  inconvenience  of  a  delay  in  a  matter  of  this  nature. (0 

.     Form  of  Writ. — If  a  writ  of  mandamus  to   the  I'rerogative 

Court  of  Canterbury,  state,  that  "  the  testator  had  bona  notabilia  at  West- 
minster and  in  divers  dioceses,"  but  do  not  say  "  within  the  province  of 
Canterbury,  it  is  sufficient ;  for  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  presume  the 

319.  See  tits.  "Company,"  "Franchise,"  "Freedom"  (Companj-,  Restoration), 
"Freeman,"  "Office"  (Restitution). 

{fj)  Ante,  p.  9—12.  R.  v.  Betteswortb,  Fitzg.  125.  Fortre  v.  Fortre,  Holt,  42; 
1  Show.  351.  Boon's  case,  1  P.  1652,  cited  in  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  66.  R.  v. 
Raines,  12  Mod.  205.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  299.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  162.  S.  C.  Holt,  310.  S. 
C.  Ld.  Raym.  361.  Blackboruugli  v.  Davis,  Holt,  43.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  251.  Dunkin 
V.  Mun,  Raym.  236;  Trem.  PI.  Cor.  501,  -nhere  see  form  of  writ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"Man."  (D.),  and  n.  Sec  tits.  "Administration"  (When  granted),  "Certificate," 
"Excise"  (Permit),  "Lectureship"  (License). 

(A)  Ante,  p.  12,  33,  n.  (/).  Luskins  v.  Carver,  Sty.  7,  8,  (citing  Countess  of 
Berkshire's  case,  H.  20  Jac,  and  St.  Burien's  case,)  also  cited  in  Patrick's  case, 
Raym.  103.  B.  v.  Simpson,  1  W.  Blac.  455.  S.  C.  Burr.  1463.  R.  v.  Dr.  Hay,  1 
W.  Blac.  455.  S.  0.  Burr.  2295.  R.  v.  Raines,  Carth.  457.  Dunkin  v.  Mun,  Raym. 
235.  Anon.,  2  Roll.  107.  R.  v.  Raines,  12  Mod.  205.  R.  v.  Raines,  3  Salk.  232, 
11.  R.  V.  Bettesworth,  Stra.  856.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)  See  tits.  "  Courts 
Inferior." 

(«■)  Ante,  p.  33,  n.  {g).  Anon.,  2  Show.  48,  citing  Fitzg.  202.  Duncomb's  case. 
Sty.  22.  Anon.,  1  Vent.  335.  Offlev  v.  Best.  1  Lev.  187.  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  2 
Show.  74.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.)     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Enforcing  Duties). 

{j)  Ante,  p.  9,  12.     Dunkin  v.  Mun,  Raym.  236.     Vide  F.  N.  B.  200  a. 

\k)  Ante,  p.  9.  Dunkin  v.  Mun,  Raym.  *235.  S.  C.  3  Keb.  348,  citing  F.  N.  B.  63, 
Chrism's  case  and  Gold's  case.     See  tit.  "  Act  of  Parliament,"  "  Administration." 

(/)  See  ante,  p.  221,  n.  (o).  Justice  v.  Jones,  1  Barn.  280.  See  tits.  "Burial," 
"  Corpse,"  and  post,  tit.  "  Rule." 


W  I  L  L.  3'l9 

existence  of  an  inferior  jurirfdiction  ;(??i)  such  Court,  in  giving  judgment, 
said,  tliat  '' tlicy  had  dccidcd,(;i)  that  they  (the  Court  at  Westminster) 
were  bound  to  take  notice  under  what  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  they 
sat."(o) 

.     Returns,  Lis  Pendens. — It  is  clearly  settled,  that  the  pendency 

of  a  suit  in  the  Ecclesiastical  Court,  concerning  the  validity  of  the  will,  is 
a  sufficient  answer  and  return  to  a  mandamus  to  grant  probate  of  it,(2)) 
or  for  the  application  for  the  rule,  if  such  a  fact  appear  upon  the  affida- 
vits.(y)  But  the  Court  will  not  supersede  the  writ,  if  it  should  have 
issued  before  the  will  was  litigated. (?•) 

.     Insolveivij,  &c. — It  is  not  a  good  return  to  such  a  writ,  that 

probate  is  denied,  because  the  executor  is  in  indigent  or  insolvent  circum- 
stances; nor  can  the  inferior  Court,  in  such  a  case,  require  him  to  give 
security  for  the  due  performance  of  the  will;  for  the  testator  is  the  pro- 
per and  only  judge  of  the  qualifications  of  his  executor.(.s)  So  that  a 
return  that  the  prosecutor  would  not  give  caution  or  security,  r^.^^-q-, 
being  an  insolvent  or  bankrupt,  is  bad.(0  *The  Court  will  not,  L  -'  J 
however,  command  the  issuing  of  probate,  although  the  will  be  not  in 
contest,  if  it  be  merely  delayed  till  the  executor  render  an  account  of  his 
testator's  estate,  his  testator  having  been  an  administrator  during  mino- 
rity, &c.(«) 

(m)  R.  V.  Betteswortli,  Stra.  857.     See  post,  tk.  "  AVrit"  (Form). 

\n)  Adams  v.  Savage,  cited  in  1  Barn.  299. 

(o)  R.  V.  Betiesworth,  1  Barn.  299. 

{p)  Ante,  p.  22,  23.  R.  v.  Hay,  Burr.  2295,  cited  in  G  T.  R.  302.  R.  v.  Beties- 
worth, Stra.  857.  S.  C.  Andr.  3G5.  R.  v.  Betteswortli  (Dr.),  1  Barn.  299,  per  Rey- 
nolds, J.  S.  C.  2  Barn.  234.  S.  C.  Stra.  95G.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  139.  Anon.,  5  Mod. 
374.  See  R.  v.  Harris,  (Dr.),  1  W.  Blac.  430.  Lovegrove  v.  Bethell,  1  "VV.  Blac. 
668  ;  AVms.  Exors.  283  ;  Stra.  1111 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3.  Gray  v.  Tench, 
Comb.  454.  See  tits.  "  Administration,  Letters  of"  (Return,  Lis  pendens),  "  Church- 
warden" (Return,  Lis  pendens). 

(q)  Ante,  p.  36,  n.  (A).  Lovegrove  v.  Bethell,  1  W.  Blac.  GGS.  Dunkin  v.  Mun, 
1  Vent.  335.  S.  C.  Raym.  235.  R.  v.  Raines,  1  Salk.  299.  S.  C.  Carth.  457.  See 
post,  tit.  "Application"  (Rule,  Affidavits). 

(r)  Ante,  p.  36,  n.  {h).  R.  v.  Dr.  Bettesworth,  7  Mod.  218.  S.  C.  2  Barn.  420. 
S.  C.  Andr.  365.  S.  C.  Stra.  857.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  291,  331,  424.  Anon.,  5  Mod. 
374.     Sec  post,  tit.  "  Supersedeas." 

(s)  Ante,  p.  71,  n.  (h).  R.  v.  Raines,  12  Mod.  205.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  136.  S.  C.  1 
Salk.  299.  S.  C.  Garth.  457.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  162,  233.  S.  G.  Holt,  310.  S.  C.  3 
P.  Wms.  337,  n.  (B.)  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  361.  R.  v.  Bettesworth,  Stra.  857.  S.  C. 
Fitzg.  125.  Justice  v.  Jones,  1  Barn.  280.  R.  v.  Bettesworth,  1  Barn.  298.  R.  v. 
Simpson,  1  W.  Blac.  456.  S.  C.  Burr.  1463.  Hathornwaite  v.  Russell,  2  Atk.  126. 
Hills  v.  Mills,  1  Show.  293.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  36.  S.  C.  Comb.  185.  S.  C.  Skin.  299. 
S.  C.  12  Mod.  9.  S.  C.  Holt,  305.  Dunkin  v.  Brown,  3  Keb.  350, 351 ;  1  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"Man."  (D.),  n.;  2  Bac.  Abr.  377  ;  Wms.  Exors.  284.  See  tits.  "Churchwarden" 
(Return,  Pauperism). 

{t)  R.  V.  Raines,  1  Salk.  299,  and  cases  there  cited.  S.  C.  3  P.  Wms.  336,  n.  (B.) 
S.  C.  Carth.  457.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  162.  R.  v.  Bettesworth,  1  Barn.  299,  per  Page,  J. 
Luskins  v.  Carver,  Sty.  8,  9,  and  cases  there  cited.  See  also  Patrick's  case,  Raym. 
103  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A.) ;  Wms.  Exors.  284.  ■  And  see  tit.  "  Administra- 
tion" (When  granted). 

{u)  Ante.  p.  34,  n.  («•),  [x).  Dunkin  v.  Dunkin,  3  Keb.  344.  See  Sand's  case, 
4  Car.  1,  1  Sid.  179.     And  see  tit.  "Administration"  (When  granted). 


330  tapping's    mandamus. 

"•]     A2'>j>raisement. — A  return  of  tlic  pcnclency  of  the  commission 


of  appraisement  has  been  held  not  to  be  good ;  for  the  Spiritual  Court 
cannot  restrain  probate  for  this  cause. (v)  But  where  the  will  is  under 
litifation,  then  commissions  of  this  sort  are  reasonable,  to  protect  the 
estate,  (if) 

.]     Incapax. — To  such  a  mandamus,  a  return  of  "  incapax"  of  the 

executor,  has  been  held  not  to  bo  good.(.^;) 

.]     Non  Compos. — It  was  at  one  time  doubtful  whether   '' non 

compos"  of  executor  was  a  good  return,  but  more  recent  decisions  shew, 
that  as  such  an  affliction  is  a  natural  disability,  so  administration  cum 
testamento,  c*cc.  may  be  granted  in  such  a  case;(y)  such  a  fact  is  therefore 
a  good  return.  So,  a  grant,  &c.,  to  such  an  one,  would  be  an  entirely 
vain  and  fruitless  act,  which  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  put  itself  in 
motion  to  eflfect. 

A  return  iXwit  prohate  is  restrained  according  to  practice  is  bad,  unless 
such  practice  be  founded  upon  stat.  21  Hen.  8,  c.  5,  for  the  Ecclesiastical 
Court  cannot  set  up  their  practice  against  the  law  of  the  land.  (2) 

.]     Renunciation. — The  writ  lies  to  allow  an  executor  to  retract 

his  renunciation  of  the  executorship,  and  to  command  a  grant  of  a  joint 
probate  to  him  and  his  co-executor,  (a) 

.]     Prolate,  Stamp. — The  writ  hasbeen  granted  to  command  the 

commissioners  of  stamps  to  repay  a  sum  of  money  lecaived  by  them  in 
excess  of  the  proper  probate  duty.(Z') 

.]      Will,  Deliver}/. — The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not  command  the 

r*->sm  *f*i'erogative  or  other  Court  to  deliver  out  to  an  heir  or  devisee  a 
will  of  land,  there  being  no  precedent  for  such  a  writ,  and  because 
he  has  another  and  specific  legal  remedy  by  detinue  or  action  upon  the 
case,  by  which  Twysden,  J.,  remembered  to  have  been  brought  for  that 
cause. (c)  But  it  seems  the  Court  would  command  the  delivery  out  of 
such  will  after  it  had  been  first  proved  per  testes. (f?) 

(?')  Ante,  p.  12.  R.  v.  Cutteswortb.  Stra.  85Y.  S.  C.  Fitzg.  125.  Justice  v. 
Jones,  1  Barn.  280.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  293,  nom.  R.  t.  Betteswortli.  Dunkia  v.  Mun, 
Rajm.  233  ;  Wms.  Exors.  234.     See  tit.  "  Administration." 

[iv)  1  Barn.  299,  supra,  n.  (v)  ;  see  supra,  "  Returns  of  Lis  pendens,  Insolvency," 
&c.,  and  ante,  p.  .34,  n.  (?f),  (z). 

(x)  R.  y.  Raines,  1  Salk.  299.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  366.  Hills  v.  Mills,  1  Salk.  36, 
and  cases  there  cited  ;  and  see  cases  in  next  note.  See  tits.  "  Office"  (Admission, 
Return  not  qualified),  (Restoration,  Return,  Incapacity  to  execute  Office). 

(y)  Ante,  p.  15,  16.  R.  v.  Raines,  1  Salk.  299.  S.  C.  Ld.  Ravm.  361.  S.  C. 
Iloit,  310.  Hills  V.  Mills,  1  Salk.  36.  S.  C.  1  Show.  295,  n.  (A).  "S.  C.  Holt,  305. 
S.  0.  Comb.  185.  S.  C.  Skin.  299.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  9,  and  cases  there  cited.  Price 
v.  Parker,  1  Lev.  158,  per  Twysden.  J.  OSlcy  v.  Best,  1  Lev.  186.  S.  C.  1  Sid. 
293.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  371,  373.  Dunkin's  case,  3  Keb.  348,  350.  S.  C.  Raym.  235. 
Pierce  v.  Perks,  1  Sid.  280,  per  Twysden,  J. 

(2)  Ante,  p.  34,  n.  [w),  (x).  R.  v.  Bettesworth,  Stra.  857.  Wms.  Exors.  284. 
See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions"  (Appeal). 

(a)  R.  V.  Simpson,  1  W.  Blac.  455.     S.  C.  Burr.  1463;  Anon.,  1  Vent.  335. 

(A)  R.  V.  Stamp  Commissioners  6  Q.  B.  G57.t  S.  C.  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  75,  Q.  B., 
where  see  a  form  of  writ.  See  tits.  "  Constabb-"  (Reimbursement),  "Drainage" 
(Rcimbursemeni),  '•  Highway"  (Surveyor,  Reimbursement). 

(c)  Ante,  p.  18—27.  Savill's  case,  2  Keb.  GIO.  S.  C.  nom.  Sabine's  case,  Sid. 
443. 

{d}  2  Keb.  610.     S.  C.  Sid.  443,  supra,  n.  (r) ;  and  see  Anon.,  Comb.  289. 


WITNESS.  331 

.]      Transmission  J  &c. — It  seems  that,  on  a  proper  case,  the  ■nrit 

•would  be  granted  to  command  the  commissary  of  an  archdeacon  to  trans- 
mit an  original  -will  to  the  Judge  of  a  Bishop's  Court,  and  to  leave  it 
there  for  the  purpose  of  having  administration  granted. (e) 

.]  Inrolment. — The  writ  has  been  granted  to  command  a  com- 
pany to  make  in  a  book  kept  for  that  purpose,  an  entry  of  the  probate  of 
a  will,  and  of  the  name  and  place  of  A.  H.  as  the  owner,  proprietor  or 
person  entitled  to  a  share  in  the  profits  of  the  company  belonging  to  the 
testator  at  the  time  of  his  death. (/) 

The  writ  lies  to  command  the  mayor  of  a  borough  to  enrol  a  testament, 
which  by  custom  ought  to  be  enrolled. ((/) 

Witness.]  The  writ  does  not  lie  to  command  a  county  treasurer  to 
pay  the  expenses  of  a  witness  in  a  case  of  felony  pursuant  to  an  order  of 
sessions,  the  proper  remedy  being  by  indictment  or  by  attachment,  in  the 
inferior  Court  and  not  by  mandamus. (A) 

WooDVv'ARD  OF  LoNDON.]  Restoration. — The  writ  of  mandamus  has 
been  granted  to  command  restoration  to  the  public  office  of  woodward  of 
the  city  of  London,  its  duties  being,  to  take  care  that  the  wood  and 
coal  for  the  use  of  the  City  of  London  be  kept  according  to  the  proper 
assize,  (i) 

Wood  Wharf  Yeoman.]     See  title  Yeoman  of  Wood  Wharf. 

Works.]  The  writ  lies  to  command  the  performance  of  works,  under 
and  according  to  the  provisions  of  an  act  of  Parliament,  provided  there 
be  no  specific  legal  remedy. (J) 

*Yeoman  of  Wood  Wharf.]      Restoration. — The  writ  lies  p^..2o-|-| 
to  command  restoration  to  the  office  of  yeoman  of  the  wood  wharf, 
it  being  both  an  ancient  public  office,  and  a  freehold. (7^-) 

York,  Sheriffs'  Court  of.]  See  titles  Attomeij ;  Coiirts  Inferior 
{Sheriffs');    Sheriffs. 

(e)  R.  r.  Yonge,  5  M.  &  S.  120. 

(/)  Ex  parte  Home,  7  B.  &  C.  632.f     See  tits.  "  Books,"  "  Company"  (Share). 

{g)  Bishopp's  case,  2  Roll.  106;  Com. Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)     See  tit.  "  Custom." 

[h]  Ante,  p.  20.  R.  v.  Surrey  (Treasurer),  1  Chit.  C50.f  See  the  practice  as  to 
an  attachment  in  such  case,  id.  n.  (a).  R.  v.  Jeyes,  3  A.  &  E.  419.f  S.  C.  5  N.  & 
M.  lOl.f  S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  325.  See  tits.  "  County"  (Treasurer),  ''  Courts  Inferior" 
(Judgment,  Execution,  &c.).  "Office"  (Ministerial,  Inferior),  (Officers  of  Courts). 

(«')  Anon.,  1  Barn.  123,  135,  154.  Schriven's  case,  Stra.  832;  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"Man."  (C.)     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Public). 

[j]  Ante,  p.  18—27.  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railwaj^,  10  A.  &  E.  557.1  S.  C. 
4P.  &  D.  48.  R.  T.  Wells  (Mayor),  4  D.  562.  See  tits.  "Act  of  Parliament," 
"Company,"  (Directors,  Duties,  &c.),  "  Dock,"  "Inclosure,"  "Railway"  (Duties, 
&c.). 

{k)  Ante,  p.  12.  Schriven  case,  Stra.  832,  cited  in  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  H.,  6 
Geo.  2  ;  B.  R.  2  T.  R.  182,  n.  (/;)  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit..  "Man."  (A.)  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"Man."  (C.)     See  tit.  "Office"  (Public),  (Freehold),  "Water  House"  (Master of). 


332 


TAPPINGS     MANDAMUS. 


The  above  alphabetical  series  is  supposed  to  embrace  the  substance  of 
all  that  the  reported  cases,  from  the  earliest  period,  down  to  the  7  Q.  B. 
Reports  inclusive,  contain  upon  the  subject  of  "  Mandamus." 


[*282] 


^CHAPTER  THE  FOURTH. 


OF   THE   APPLICATION   TO   THE   COURT,    AND   RULE    FOR   THE   WRIT    OF 

MANDAMUS. 

Having  in  the  preceding  pages  stated  the  legal  principles  which 
govern  the  dispensation  of  the  Writ  of  Mandamus,  together  with  an 
alphabetical  series  of  the  subjects,  in  respect  whereof  it  has  been  cither 
granted  or  denied,  we  now  proceed  to  treat  of  those  practical  proceedings, 
by  means  of  which  such  writ  is  obtained. 


1st.  Applicatiox,  Proceedings  before. 

3rd.  Rule. 

Demand  and  refusal 

-  282 

How  obtained 

-  295 

Demand 

-  283 

Motion  for 

-  295 

Bj-  whom  made 

-  283 

To  what  Court     - 

-  296 

When  to  be  made    - 

-  283 

When  granted 

-  297 

To  whom  made 

-  283 

Nisi       - 

-  297 

Form  of           -         - 

-  284 

Absolute  in  first  instance  297 

Affidavits 

-  285 

How  obtained 

-  298 

Refusal      _        _         _ 

-  285 

Form  of        -         - 

-  299 

What,  form  of 

-  285 

Service  of      - 

-  300 

By  whom  made 

-  286 

Notice  of       -         - 

-  300 

Affidavits 

-  286 

Affidavit  of  service 

and 

When  want  of  demand  or 

re- 

notice 

-  300 

fusal  to  be  taken  advantage 

Enlarging 

-  301 

of             -          -          . 

-  287 

Shewing  cause  against  rule  nisi 

Notice  of  application  to  Court 

How      - 

-  301 

for  writ 

-  287 

Who  may 

-  302 

2nd.  Application  for  Rule. 

4th.  Rule  Absolute. 

Nature            _         _         _ 

-  287 

When  granted 

-  303 

By  whom  made 

-  288 

Against  whom  obtained 

-  305 

Against  whom  made 

-   290 

Form  of       -         -         - 

-  305 

When  to  be  made 

-  290 

How  obtained 

-  306 

Affidavits  in  support  of  rule 

292 

Costs             .         _         - 

-  306 

When  necessary 

-  292 

Amendment  of     - 

-  306 

What  to  contain 

-  292 

Compelling  prosecutor  to 

pro- 

Renewing  application 

-  294 

ceed  upon 

-  306 

1st.  Application,  Proceedings  previously  to.]  Demand  and 
Refusal. — It  is  an  imperative  rule  of  the  law  of  mandamus,  that,  previ- 
ously to  the  making  of  the  application  to  the  Court  for  a  writ  to  com- 
mand *the  performance  of  any  particular  act,  an  express  and  dis- 
tinct demand  or  request  to  perform  it,  must  have  been  made  by 
the  prosecutor  to  the  defendant,  who  must  have  refused  to  comply  with 
such  demand,  either  in  direct  terms,  or  by  conduct  from  which  a  refusal 
can  be  conclusively  implied;  it  being  due  to  the  defendant  to  have  the 
option  of  either  doing,  or  refusing  to  do,  that  which  is  required  of  him, 


[*283] 


APPLICATION,     ETC.  333 

before  an  application  shall  be  made  to  tlic  Court  for  the  purpose  of 
compelling  him.  Both  the  demand  and  refusal  must  also  be  shewn 
on  the  affidavits  made  use  of  in  support  of  the  application  for  the 
rule,  (a) 

.]     Demand,  hi/  wliom  made. — The  demand  may  be  made  either 

by  the  prosecutor  personally,  or  by  some  one  by  him  duly  author- 
ized, (i) 

.]     Demand,    vdicn   to    he   made. — The  demand    should  not  be 

premature  as  to  time :  thus,  in  the  case  of  the  execution  of  works  by  a 
railway  company,  under  an  act  of  Parliament,(c)  unless  such  demand  be 
made  after  completion  of  the  objectionable  work  by  the  company;  and  there- 
upon compliance  be  refused,  either  in  direct  terms  or  virtually,  a  manda- 
mus will  not  be  granted,  though  the  act  of  Parliament  have  been  palpably 
disobeyed,  and  though  the  time  assigned  for  the  performance  of  the  work 
have  elapsed ;  because,  as  the  benefit  of  such  nn  act  may  be  waived  by  the 
prosecutor,  so,  if  there  have  been  an  acquiescence  when  the  works  were 
finished,  and  no  specific  complaint  made,  it  may  be,  according  to  the  cir- 
cumstances, that  such  conduct  may  operate  as  a  waiver  by  the  prosecutor, 
notwithstanding  he  may  have  complained  of  the  improper  nature  of  the 
works  whilst  they  were  proceeding;  because  such  complaint,  though  a 
proper  precaution,  does  not  excuse  the  omission  of  a  specific  demand  after 
the  completion,  which  demand  should  be  expressive  of  what  the  prosecu- 
tor considers  to  be  the  effect  of  the  act,  &c. 

''' .]     Demand,  to  whom  made. — The  demand  must  be  made  rjiu^qi-i 

pcrsonaUy  to  those  from  whom  the  duty,  &c.  is  required. (r/)  With 
respect,  however,  to  applications  to  justices  of  the  peace  individually,  to 
do  certain  acts  which  magistrates  of  that  description  are  in  general  author- 
ized to  do,  the  generality  of  their  authority,  and  the  multitude  of  the  per- 
sons invested  with  it,  may  be  a  sufficient  reason  for  not  requiring  a  pre- 
vious application  to  cacli,  before  resort  is  had  to  the  Court  of  B.  R.  to 
correct  an  improper  refusal  of  either  of  them  to  act  when  duly  called 
.  upon.  But  where  tico  persons  only  are  specially  designated  by  the  Legis- 
lature to  do  a  certain  act,  it  is  not  sufficient  to  found  an  application  to  the 

(«)  See  ante,  p.  52,  n.  («),  84,  n.  (*).  R.  v.  Brecknock  Canal,  4  N.  &  M.  STl.f  S. 

C.  3  A.  &  E.  2l7.t  tS.  0.  1  II.  ctW.  279.  R.  v.  Ford,  2  A.  &  E.  SSS.f  S.  C.  4  N. 
&  M.  451.f  R.  v.  Beverley  (Mayor),  8  D.  143.  R.  v.  West  Looe,  3  B.  &  C.  GTT.f 
S.  C.  5  D.  &  R.  600,t  per  Bayley,  J.     R.  v.  Leicester  (J.),  4  B.  &  C.  891.f  S.  0.  7 

D.  &  R.  370.1  R.  v.  Nottingham  (J.),  3  A.  &  E.  503.f  S.  0.  5  N.  &  M.  160.-f-  R. 
V.  Frost,  8  A.  &  E.  826.t  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  75.  See  post,  "Application"  (Affi- 
davits). 

In  most  of  the  titles  of  the  preceding  series,  as  in  that  of  Raihvay,  instances 
can  be  found  of  tlie  necessity  of  a  demand  and  refusal. 

[h)  R.  V.  Ford,  2  A.  &  E.  SSS.f  S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  451.t  R.  v.  Frost,  8  A.  &  E. 
822.t  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  75.  R.  v.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  C.  G8G.f  S.  C.  5  D. 
&  R.  590.t 

(c)  R.  V.  Bristol  Railway  Company,  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  106,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  lG2.f 
S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  834.     See  lit.  "Railway"  (Duties,  &c.,  Rule). 

[d]  R.  V.  Stoke  Damerel  (Minister),  5  A.  &  E.  584.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  SG.f  R.  v. 
Wiltshire  Canal,  3  A.  &  E.  477.t  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  344.f  R.  v.  Norwich  Rail- 
way, 3  D.  &  L.  383.     S.  C.  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  24,  Q.  B.     See  post,  "Writ"  (Direction). 


334  tapping's    mandamus. 

Court  for  a  mandamus,  to  sLcw  that  au  application  Las  been  made  to  one 
of  tbcm  only.(r') 

.]  Demand,  Form  of. — The  demand  must  be  express  and  dis- 
tinct, and  not  couched  in  general  terms ;  (/)  it  should  accurately  demand 
a  performance  of  that  which  the  defendant  legally  can  and  should  do.(^) 
Thus,  where  an  act  of  Parliament  empowers  a  company  to  execute  works 
in  a  manner  therein  prescribed,  and  a  party  wishes  to  enforce  the  proper 
execution  thereof  by  mandamus,  he  must,  after  the  work  is  completed, 
specifically  require  the  company  to  perform  those  things  which,  according 
to  his  opinion,  the  act  requires. (A) 

A  demand  in  the  alternative  to  do  one  of  two,  three,  or  more  things, 
will,  if  the  duty  enjoined  form  one  of  them,  and  there  shall  have  been  a 
general  refusal  to  comply  with  such  demand,  be  sufficient,  (i)  In  some 
cases,  as  an  application  to  inspect  documents,  &c.,  the  object  of  the 
demand  should  be  stated,  in  order  that  the  defendant  may  see  the 
propriety  of  the  prosecutor's  purpose,  and  that  such  inspection,  &c., 
has  a  proper  and  definite  object,  and  not  the  gratification  of  mere  curi- 
osity, (y) 

r*.-)Qc-|      •]      '■' Demand  ;    Affidavits. — The    demand   must    clearly 

appear  to  have  been   properly  made,  by  the  affidavits(/t')  used  in 
support  of  the  application,  or  the  Court  may  lefusc  it. 

.]     Refusal,  what,  Form  of. — There  must  also,  as  before  stated, 

have  been  a  distinct  refusal  by  the  defendant  to  do  the  thing,  or  per- 
form the  duty,  &c.,(/)  previously  to  the  application  to  the  Court  for  the 
writ. 

As  to  the  form  of  the  refusal,  it  has  been  held,  that  it  is  not  necessary 
that  the  word  '•'  refuse,"  or  any  equivalent  to  it,  should  be  used  by  the 

(e)  R.  T.  London  (Ep.),  13  East,  425.  See  ante,  tit.  "Lectureship"  (Application), 
ante,  p.  146,  n.  (6). 

(/)  R.  V.  Ford,  2  A.  &  E.  588.  S.  C.  4  M.  &  N.  451,f  and  see  R.  v.  Brecknock 
Canal,  3  A.  &E.  217.1  S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  STl.f  S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  279.  S.  C.  4  L. 
J.,  N.  S.,  M.  C.  105.  R.  V.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  C.  GSG.f  S.  C.  5  D.  &  R. 
590.t  See  R.  v.  Stoke  Damerel  (Minister),  5  A.  &  E.  584.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  56,t 
and  post,  tit.  "Return''  (Certainty). 

[g]  R.  T.  Hughes,  3  A.  &  E.  425.f  See  a  form  of  demand  in  R.  v.  Frost,  8  A.  & 
E.  823.t  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  "75.  R.  v.  Kendall,  1  Q.  B.  366.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  G02. 
See  post,  "  Writ"  (Mandatory  Clause). 

(A)  R.  V.  Bristol  Railway,  4  Q.  B.  162.1  S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  384.  S.  C.  12  L.  J..  X. 
S.  106,  Q.  B.     Ante,  p.  283. 

(?)  R.  V.  St.  Margaret's  Parish,  1  P.  &  D.  116.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  8S9.f  S.  C.  1  W. 
W.  H.  673. 

{j)  Ante,  p.  16,  n.  («).  R.  v.  Wiltsh.  Canal,  3  A.  &  E.  483.1  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M. 
344,t  n.  (f?).  R.  V.  Clear,  4  B.  &  C.  899.f  S.C.  7  D.  &  R.  393.f  See  tits.  "Books," 
"Manor"  (Rolls  Inspection). 

(/;:)  Ante,  p.  283,  n.  (a).  E.x  parte  Carlton  High  Dale,  4  N.  &  M.  313.f  R.  v. 
Kendall,  1  Q.  B.  36G.t  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  602.  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  1265.  S.  C. 
1  W.  Blac.  300.  See  infra,  "Refusal"  (Affidavits),  and  post,  tit.  "Affida- 
vits." 

[l]  See  ante,  p.  283,  n.  (a).  R.  v.  Bristol  Railway,  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  106,  Q.  B. 
S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  387.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  162.f  R.  t.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  C. 
686.t  S.  C.  5  D.  &  R.  590.t  R.  v.  The  Wilts.  Canal,  8  D.  623.  R.  v.  Monta- 
cute,  1  W.  Blac.  60.     S.  C.  1  Wils.  283 ;  1  Barn.  59 ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.) 


A  r  P  L  I  C  A  T  I  0  N,     ETC. 


335 


defendant,  but  there  should  be  enough,  from  the  v/hole  of  the  facts,  to 
shew  to  the  Court,  that  for  some  improper  reason  compliance  is  withheld, 
and  a  distinct  determination  not  to  do  what  is  required  ;(m)  thus,  where 
the  affidavits  shewed  a  readiness  by  the  defendant  "  to  do  the  works,  if 
indemnified^''  such  was  held  not  to  amount  to  a  rc.fmal,  as  it  left  the 
case  short  of  the  point  to  v,-hich  it  would  have  been  brought  if  such  an 
application  had  been  made,  that  any  nonperformance  afterwards  must 
have  amounted  to  a  refusal;  as  the  delivery  of  a  notice,  stating,  "we 
desire  a  direct  answer,  and  your  not  giving  it  will  be  considered  a  refu- 
sal ;"  for  so  direct  an  application  would  probably  have  led  to  a  direct 
denial ;  therefore  in  similar  cases  such  an  application  or  something  equiva- 
lent should  have  taken  place,  in  order  to  furnish  a  ground  for  the  writ.(n) 
So,  the  fact  of  taking  reasonable  time  to  consider  before  fulfilling  the 
demand,  docs  not  amount  to  a  refusal;  for  the  prosecutor  should,  in  such 
a  case,  apply  again  to  the  defendant,  in  order  to  obtain  an  answer,  which 
shall  shew  that  the  defendant  has  exercised  *his  judgment  on  the  r*28(3-| 
demand. (o)  So,  in  a  case  where  certain  books  were  offered  for 
inspection  as  a  matter  of  favour,  and  not  as  of  right,  upon  which  right 
inspection  was  demanded,  it  was  held,  that  although  it  might  be  import- 
ant to  assert  the  right,  yet  the  prosecutor  should  have  said,  that  "he 
accepted  the  liberty  of  inspection  as  of  riyJit,  and  not  as  of  favour  ;"  if, 
thereupon,  the  books  had  been  withheld,  such  would  have  amounted  to  a 
refusal,  (p) 

The  Court  has  hovrever  held,  that  the  rescinding  of  an  original  resolu- 
tion on  which  a  dispatch  was  framed,  is  equivalent  to  an  absolute  refusal 
to  transmit  such  dispatch,  and  sufficient  to  authorize  the  Court  to  enter- 
tain" the  subject-matter  of  the  mandamus. (g')  So,  an  answer  to  a  demand 
that  the  defendant  "will  not  disobey  the  order  of  the  Court  of  B.  R.," 
amounts  to  a  refusal  to  comply  without  such  an  order. (r)  So,  if  it  be 
clear  from  the  acts  of  the  defendant,  that  he  does  not  intend  to  comply 
with  the  demand,  a  statement  of  the  facts  upon  which  such  supposition 
of  the  prosecutor  is  based,  will  be  considered  by  the  Court  as  tantamount 

(m)  Ante,  p.  283,  n.  [a).  R.  v.  Brecknock  Canal,  3  A.  &  E.  2l7.t  S.  C.  4  N.  k 
M.  STl.f  S.  0.  1  H.  &  W.  279.  S.  C.  4  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  M.  C.  105.  R.  v.  Ford,  2  A. 
&  E.  588.f  S.  0.  4  N.  &  M.  451.t  R.  v.  East  India  Company,  4  B.  &  Ad.  537.1 
S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  335.f  R.  v.  Kent  (J.),  9  B.  &  C.  285,  287.t  Ex  parte  Winfield,  J 
A.  &  E.  GU.f  R.  V.  Bristol  Railway,  4  Q.  B.  162.f  S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  387.  S.  C. 
12  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  Q.  B.  106.  R.  v.  Thames  Commrs.,  8  A.  &  E.  901,t  n.  {b).  R.  v. 
Middlesex  (Archdeacon),  3  A.  &  E.  615.f  R.  v.  Stoke  Damerel  (Minister),  5  A.  & 
E.  584.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  F.  SG.f  R.  v.  Norwich  (Railway),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  24,  Q.  B. 
S.  C.  3D.  &L.  385. 

(n)  3  A.  &E.  2l7.t  S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  871.t  S.  C.  1  II.  &  W.  279.  S.  C.  4  L. 
J.,  N.  S.  105,  M.  C,  supra,  n.  {m).  R.  v.  Wiltshire  Canal,  3  A.  &  E.  483.f  S.  C. 
5  N.  &  M.  344. f  supra,  n.  (J)     See  ante,  p.  283,  u.  (a) 

(o)  3  A.  &  E.  483.t  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  344,f  supra,  n.  {n).  R.  v.  Wilts.  Canal,  3 
D.  623.     R.  V.  Kendall,  1  Q.  B.  366.t     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  602. 

(p)  R.  T.  Northleach  Roads,  5  B.  &  Ad.  982.1 

{q)  R.  V.  East  India  Company,  4  B.  &  Ad.  535.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  335,  349.1  See 
tit.  "  East  India  Company." 

(r)  R.  V.  Middlesex  (Archdeacon),  3  A.  k  E.  Gl7.t     S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  494.t 


336  tapping's    mandamus. 

to  a  refusal. (.s)  So,  a  colourable  adjournment  or  procrastination  of  the 
performance  of  an  act  for  the  purpose  of  delay,  is  equivalent  to  a  refusal, 
and  the  Court  will  award  the  mandamus,  (if)  But  the  Court  will  not 
award  the  writ,  where  the  refusal  has  been  bona  fide,  or  was  justifiable  at 
the  time  it  was  made.(?<) 

.]     Refusal,  hy  wliom. — The  refusal  must  not  only  be  clear,  but 

must  be  made  by  those  properly  called  upon  to  do  the  act,  &c.  Thus, 
the  Court  refused  a  mandamus  to  permit  an  inspection  of  books,  &c.  by 
a  company,  where  there  bad  been  no  refusal  by  the  committee,  althougli 
there  had  been  a  direct  refusal  by  the  clerk,  in  whose  possession  the 
books,  &c.  were,  and  notwithstanding  that  previously  to  such  refusal  by 
the  clerk,  upon  an  application  having  been  made  to  the  committee,  they 
had  given  a  qualified  refusal. («;) 

.     Affidavits. — The  refusal  must  clearly  appear  by  the  affidavits, 

in  order  that  the  Court  may  judge  as  to  its  sufficiency  :{ic)  but  the  rea- 
r*2S71  ^*^°^  '^'^^  grounds  of  the  refusal  need  not  be  set  forth ;  it  is  suSicicnt 
to  state  the  fact  of  refusal,  if  express,  or  if  inferential,  the  facts 
from  which  such  refusal  is  inferred ;  and  this  practice  also  obtains  in 
those  cases  where  the  rule  is  absolute  in  the  first  instance. (./;) 

.]     When  leant  of  demand  or  refusal  can  he  tahen  advantage  of. 

— The  objection  as  to  the  neglect  of  a  demand,  or  the  absence  of  a  refusal, 
should,  in  order  to  prevent  a  waste  of  time,  be  objected  to  in  the  first 
instance,  viz.  on  shewing  cause  against  the  rule  for  the  writ,  and  cannot 
be  made  after  the  merits  of  the  case  have  been  discussed. (y)  In  M.  T., 
3  Vict.,  Lord  Denman,  C.  J.,  announced,  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.  had 
come  to  a  resolution  not  to  entertain  an  objection  to  a  rule  for  a  man- 
damus, on  the  ground  that  there  had  been  no  refusal  to  do  the  thing 
required  by  the  writ,  unless  such  objection  should  have  been  taken  at  the 
the  outset  of  the  argument  in  shewing  cause. (.s) 

.]     Notice  of  Application  to  Court  for  writ. — In  general,  no 

notice  of  the  intended  application  to  the  Court  for  a  rule  to  issue  a  writ  of 
mandamus  is  necessary,  previously  to  the  making  of  such  application, 
except  in  those  cases  in  which  it  is  either  expressly  required  by  statute, 

(s)  R.  T.  Birmingham  Canal,  2  W.  Blac.  708,  and  see  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties 
Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  561.1     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.     See  ante,  p.  283,  n.  {a). 

(t)  R.  T.  St.  Margaret,  1  P.  &  D.  IKJ.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  889  ;t  and  see  8  A.  k  E. 
901,jn.  [b). 

(u)  Ex  parte  Parkes,  9  D.  616. 

(v)  R.  V.  Wiltshire  Canal,  3  A.  &  E.  483.t  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  344.f  Sec  also  3  G. 
&  D.  386.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  160,f  supra.  R.  v.  Middlesex  (Archdeacon),  5  N.  &  M. 
497  ;f  and  see  R.  v.  Excise  (Commissioners,)  6  Q.  B.  981,f  n.  (b). 

{lo)  Ante,  p.  283,  n.  (a).  Ex  parte  Carlton  High  Dale,  4  N.  k  M.  313.f  R.  v. 
Barker,  Burr.  1265.  S.  C.  1  \Y.  Blac.  300.  And"  see  supra,  "  Demand"  (Affida- 
vits). 

(z)  Ex  parte  Winfield,  3  A.  k  E.  614.f  See  post,  tit.  "Affidavits,"  and  post, 
p.  298. 

(?/)  R.  V.  Bristol  Railway,  3  G.  k  D.  387.  S.  C.  4  Q.  B.  171, f  per  Ld.  Denman, 
0.  .J.,  citing  R.  v.  The  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  531,  545,f  and  n.  [b). 
S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48  ;  2  P.  &  D.  648 ;  1  Railw.  Cas.  509. 

(2)  3  P.  &  D.  123,  n.  (d). 


APPLICATION,     ETC. 


337 


&c.,(cf)  or  in  which  the  rule  being  absolute  in  the  first  instance,  the  prac- 
tice of  the  Court  directs,  that  notice  of  the  intended  application  shall  be 
given  to  the  person  against  whom  it  is  about  to  be  madc.(/^) 

2nd.  Application  for  Rule.]  Nature  of. — The  application  to  the 
Court  of  B.  R.,  for  a  rule  for  a  writ  of  mandamus,  in  all  matters  affect- 
ing the  puhlic,  is  ex  debito  justitia3.(r)  So  if  a  statute,  charter,  &c., 
specially  delegate  to  the  Court  of  B.  R.  the  power  of  enforcing  certain 
duties  and  requirements  by  writ  of  mandamus,(c^)  or  make  the  r^ngg-i 
^granting  of  such  writ  matter  of  positive  law,  the  applicant  is,  on  •- 
a  proper  case,  entitled  to  such  writ  ex  debito  justitise,  and  on  such  occa- 
sions the  Court  has  no  discretionary  power  either  as  to  the  granting  or 
the  withholding  of  it;  neither  can  it  either  fetter  nor  delay  it.(e) 

Where,  however,  the  right  or  power  is  of  a  private  nature,  as  in  the 
case  of  many  offices,  &c.,  in  which  the  public  are  not  primarily  concerned, 
it  is  discretionary  in  the  Court,  in  the  first  instance,  either  to  grant  or 
refuse  the  application  ;(/)  or  to  grant  a  rule  to  shew  cause  why  it  should 
not  issue.  But  where  the  granting  of  the  application  is  in  the  discretion 
of  the  Court,  such  discretion  must  be,  and  is,  governed  by  certain  prin- 
ciples ;(y)  that  is,  agreeably  to  the  justice  of  the  case,  and  as  the  interests 
of  the  parties  seem,  in  its  judgment,  to  require  ;(/i)  thus,  as  a  general 
rule,  the  Court  will  always  refuse  the  writ,  unless  the  defendant  have 
acted  wrongly.  (•*') 

.]     Bij  ivJiom  made. — In  general  all  those  who  are  legally  capable 

of  bringing  an  action,  are  also  equally  capable  of  applying  to  the  Court 
of  B.  R.  for  the  writ  of  mandamus;  so  all  those  who  are  legally  deprived 

(a)  Ante,  p.  167,  n.  (a),  183,  n.  (/).  R.  v.  Jones,  Sir.  104.  See  stat.  6  &  T  Vict, 
c.  89,  s.  5,  App.,  and  the  different  titles  of  the  preceding  series,  where  such  notice 
has  been  held  to  be  necessary,  as  tit.  "  Ofiace"  (Election,  Notice  of  Application). 

(b)  Ex  parte  Winfield,  3  A.  &  E.  614.f  As  to  when  a  rule  for  a  writ  is  absolute, 
in  the  first  instance,  see  the  several  titles  of  the  preceding  series,  and  infra,  tit. 
"  Rule." 

(c)  See  ante,  p.  56,  n.  (o).  Bull.  N.  P.  199.  Anon.,  2  Barn.  237  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit, 
"  Man."  (E.)  R.  v.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  0.  G83.f  S.  C.  5  D.  &  R.  590.t  See 
ante,  tit.  "Burgess"  (Election,  Application). 

(d)  R.  T.  Greene,  6  A.  &  E.  548. f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  GSl.f  See  tits.  "  Act  of  Par- 
liament," "Charters,"  &c.,  and  ante,  p.  11. 

(e)  See  ante,  p.  54,  n.  (a).     R.  v.  Evesham  (Corp.),  Kel.  244. 

(/)  See  ante,  p.  112,  n.  (y).  Gas.  t.  Hard.  99;  Burr.  2189.  Anon.,  2  Barn.  237  ; 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (A.),  (E.)  R.  v.  Excise  Gommissioners,  2  T.  R.  385.  R.  v. 
Glear,  4  B.  &  C.  899.1     S.  C.  7  D.  &  R.  393.1     R.  v.  Croydon,  5  T.  R.  714. 

(r/)  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  1  T.  R.  425,  426.  R.  v.  Palmer,  8  East,  425.  R.  v. 
Builer,  8  East,  392 ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (E.)  R.  v.  Luton  Roads  Trustees,  1  G. 
&  D.  251.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  Seo.f  R.  v.  Manchester  Railway,  1  G.  &  D.  344.  R.  v. 
Excise  Commissioners,  2  T.  R.  381.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  177.  R.  t. 
Griffiths,  5  B.  &  A.  731.t  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Bristol  (Mayor),  1  D.  &  R.  389.t  Anon., 
2  Barn.  236. 

(k)  R.  V.  Brewers'  Company,  4  D.  &  R.  496.f  S.  C.  5  M.  &  R.  140,  153.  R.  v. 
Paddington  Vestry,  9  B.  &  C.  461.f  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E. 
543.f  R.  T.  Excise  Commissioners,  2  T.  R.  385.  R.  v.  Buckiughamsh.  (J.),  1  B. 
&  C.  489.t     9  B.  &  C.  461.1 

(i)  R.  T.  Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  403. 

May,  1852.— 22 


338  TAPriNO'S     MANDAMUS. 

of  the  power  to  bring  an  action,  are  also  equally  prevented  from  applying 
for  such  writ. (J)  Thus  the  writ  will  not  be  granted  at  the  instance  of  a 
man  outlawed,  until  the  outlawry  has  been  reversed ;  and  it  has  been 
held,  that  such  reversal  must  be  shewn  on  the  writ,  for  the  Court  cannot 
otherwise  take  notice  of  it  ;(/,■)  therefore  the  outlawry  of  the  prosecutor  is 
a  good  return. 

The  application  for  the  rule,  &c.,  must  be  made  by  him  or  them  who 
has  or  have  the  immediate  right  to  the  subject-matter  of  the  writ;  there- 
fore it  will  not  be  entertained,  but  dismissed,  if  made  by  those  who  have 
but  a  remote  interest  in  the  subject.  Thus  where  a  controversy  existed 
in  a  municipal  corporation,  between  the  freemen  under  the  old 
^  ^  ^  *charter,  and  the  town  council,  under  stat.  5  &  6  "\Vm.  4,  c.  76,  as 
to  the  exclusive  right  of  the  former  to  some  corporation  property  for  their 
own  private  use,  respecting  which  a  public  meeting  of  the  freemen  had 
been  held,  and  a  resolution  carried,  at  the  instance  of  A.,  a  freeman, 
"  that  the  rents  should  be  paid  into  the  hands  of  the  defendant,  to  wait 
until  the  claim  of  the  freemen  should  be  decided."  The  rents  having 
been  so  paid,  and  a  rule  nisi  having  been  obtained  by  A.,  as  a  freeman 
burgess,  and  inhabitant  of  the  borough,  liable  to  contribute  to  the  borough 
rate,  for  a  mandamus  to  the  defendant  to  pay  over  the  money  into  the 
hands  of  the  treasurer  of  the  borough  ;  the  Court  discharged  the  rule,  and 
held  that  the  parties  to  apply  in  such  a  case  were  the  town  council,  trea- 
surer, or  other  authorized  party,  and  not  any  individual  having  a  remote 
interest  in  the  corporation  funds. (Z)  So  an  application  to  restore  a  deputy 
officer  who  has  been  wrongfully  dejDrived,  will  be  refused,  if  it  be  made  at 
the  instance  of  such  deputy,  because  the  party  who  is  immccliateli/  con- 
cerned in  interest,  is  the  appointor  of  the  deputy,  for  it  is  freehold  which 
is  concerned. (?3i) 

When  an  application  is  made,  the  object  of  which  is  to  obtain  the  benefit 
of  certain  provisions  of  an  act  of  Parliament,  &c.,  those  for  whose  benefit 
such  provisions  were  inserted  in  the  act,  &c.,  should  be  the  applicants  for 
the  rule,  although  they  may  be  neither  specially  nor  nominally  mentioned. 
Thus  the  Court  has  granted  a  mandamus  to  aj^point  overseers  for  a  ham- 
let, upon  an  af&davit  that  there  w^ere  poor  belonging  to  it,  notwithstand- 
ing that  the  act  (13  &  14  Car.  2,  c.  12),  does  not  specifically  state  who  is 
to  enforce  the  appointment.(7?) 

If  necessary,  the  writ  may  be  obtained  on  the  application  of  one  who  is 

(y)  See  ante,  tit.  "  Crown  Cnstoms,"  "  Manor"  (Royal),  "Visitor." 

{k)  R.  V.  Bristol  (Mayor),  1  Show.  288.  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Rowc,  (Carth.  199. 
S.  G.  Comb.  145;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."(B.)  See  post,  tits.  "Writ"  (Form  of) 
"Return."     And  ante,  p.  27,  28. 

(0  Ante,  p.  94,  n.  (a).  R.  v.  Frost,  1  P.  &  D.  75.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  822.1  S.  C. 
1  W.  W.  &  H.  664;  2  Jur.  9G6.  R.  v.  Witham  Savings'  Bank,  1  A.  &  E.  321.t 
S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  416.f  The  stat.  1  W.  4,  c.  21,  does  not  affect  the  law  concerning 
the  parties  by  whom  a  mandamus  must  be  prosecuted.  R.  v.  Edlaston  (Over- 
seers), 1  N.  &  P.  20.t     S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  163. 

(m)  See  ante,  p.  178,  n.  (o),  252  (e),  and  see  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration). 

\n)  Ante,  p.  32,  n.  {w).  R.  v.  Cumberland,  1  M.  &  S.  193.  R.  v.  Westmoreland, 
1  Wils.  138.    R.  V.  Kent,  (J.),  14  East,  395.     See  tit.  "Overseers." 


APPLICATION,    ETC.  339 

bound  to  make  a  return  to  it.  Thus,  a  writ  of  mandamus  to  the  overseers 
and  churchwardens  of  a  parish  to  malcc  a  poor's  rate,  may  he  i.?sued  on  the 
application  of  one  of  the  overseers,  where  it  appears  by  affidavit  that  the 
other  overseer  has  refused  to  concur  in  making  the  rate  ;  and  it  has  been 
held,  that  the  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  makes  no  difference  as  to  the  parties 
who  may  obtain  the  writ.(6i) 

In  certain  cases  where  no  particular  person  has  been  interested,  the 
Court  has  granted  the  writ,(|))  in  order  to  avoid  a  defect  of  police. 

* .]     Against  whom  made. — The  application  for  the  rule  r^ogn-i 

should  be  made  against  all  those,  if  more  than  one,  whose  duty  it 
will  be  to  execute  the  writ,  if  it  should  ultimately  issue  •,{<i)  thus  if  seve- 
ral persons  form  but  one  artificial  person  or  officer,  they  must  all  be  made 
the  subject  of  the  same  rule.(r)  The  application  should  clearly  disclose 
to  the  Court  in  what  official  capacity,  if  any,  the  writ  is  intended  to  be 
directed.  («) 

As  to  an  application  against  the  Crown,  see  titles  Croim  ;  Customs  ; 
Manor  (Royal). 

.]      When  to  he  made. — The  application  for  the  rule  should  not  be 

premature  as  to  time;  for  the  Court  will  not  grant  it  before  the  proper 
time  for  the  application  shall  arrive,  for  imtil  then  it  cannot  be  ascertained 
but  that  the  defendant  will  proceed  regularly.(0  Thus,  the  Roman  law 
has  a  rule,  that  "nihil  peti  potest  ante  id  tempus,  quo  per  rerum  naturam 
persolvi  possit;  ct  cum  solvendi  tempus  obligationi  additur,  nisi,  eo  pra3- 
terito,  pcti  non  potest." («)  The  general  rule,  however,  as  to  the  time  of 
the  application,  is,  that  it  must  be  made  within  a  reasonaUe  time,  after 
the  default,  neglect  of  duty,  &c.,  especially  if  the  applicant  have  another, 
though  not  so  efficacious  a  remedy  as  by  writ  of  mandamus,  (v) 

If  the  proper  time  for  the  doing  of  the  act,  &c.,  cannot  be  ascertained, 
the  mandamus  will  be  granted  immediately  tqjon  dcfaidt,  if  it  be  shewn 
that  by  a  refusal  of  it  great  public  inconvenience  may  accrue ;  [w)  and  it 
has  been  held  to  be  no  ground  of  refusing  an  application  for  a  writ  to 

(o)  Ante,  p.  220,  n.  (e),  221,  n.  {q).  R.  v.  Gadsby,  IN.  &  P.  5V2.t  Anon.,  2 
Chit.  254.f     See  stats.  1  Wm.  4,  s.  21,  (E.),  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113  (I.),  App. 

{p)  See  ante,  p.  32,  n.  (w),  and  supra,  n.  (n).  Town  of  Nottingham's  case,  Bull. 
N.  P.,  tit.  "Man."  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  181.  See  tit.  "Act  of  Parliament"  (Applica- 
tion). 

(<?)  R.  V.  King's  Lynn  (J.),  3  B.  &  C.  149,  152 ;  Bull.  N.  P.  195.  R.  v.  Clerken- 
well  (Parish),  Bull.  N.  P.  200.     See  ante,  p.  284,  n.  (f),  286,  n.  [v). 

As  to  those  who  are  subject  to  the  writ,  see  ante,  p.  29,  and  the  several  titles  of 
tliG  ftlnlifibcticfil  scries. 

(r)  R.  V.  Middlesex  (Archdeacon),  3  A.  &  E.  G15.  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  494. 

(.sj  Papillon's  case,  Skin.  64.  R.  t.  West  Looe,  3  B.  &  C.  685.  S.  C.  5  D.  &  R. 
592.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (F.) 

(t)  R  V.  Attwood,  4  B.  &  Ad.  484.  R.  v.  Bumstead,  2  B.  &  Ad.  699.  E.  v.  Mil- 
verton,  (Manor),  3  A.  &  E.  285.  R.  v.  Kent  (J.),  9  B.  &  C.  286.  R.  v.  London  Rail- 
way, 15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  42,  Q.  B.     S.  C.  3  D.  &  L.  399. 

(m)  Celsus,  lib.  12,  D. ;  D.  50,  17,  186. 

[v]  See  ante,  p.  8T,  n.  (A),  184,  n.  (A). 

[w]  3  A.  &  E.  286,  supra,  n.  (;;).  Sec  tits.  "Alderman"  (Election,  Applicatiou), 
"  Burgess  Roll"  (Application). 


340  TAPriNG'S     5IANDAMUS. 

command  the  execution  of  the  powers  of  an  act  of  Parliament,  that  the 
period  of  time  with  reference  to  which  such  powers  are  limited,  has  ex- 
pired.(a,) 

The  grounds  of  prematurity  are  as  various  as  the  requisites  necessary 
to  complete  the  prosecutor's  right,  as  want  of  notice  of  application,  where 
such  is  necessary, (,?/)  or  the  absence  of  a  demand  or  refusal. 
r*9Qn      *If  the  application  for  the  rule  be  moved  for  prematurely,  it 
will  be  dismissed,  with  costs. (;j) 

There  is  no  limitation  of  time  within  which  an  application  for  a  rule 
for  a  mandamus  need  be  made,  except  that  it  should  be  within  a  rcuson- 
ohlefime;  but  if  the  applicant  improperly  delay  such  application,  the 
Court  will  refuse  to  interfere,  agreeably  with  the  rule,  "  vigilantibus  non 
doi-mientibus  jura  subserviunt."(a) 

As  before  stated,  the  only  rule  as  to  the  time  within  which  an  applica- 
tion for  the  writ  must  be  made,  is,  that  it  must  be  made  within  a  reason- 
ahle  time  after  the  right  has  accrued,  such  reasonable  time  to  be  ascer- 
tained by  a  consideration  of  the  circumstances  of  each  particular  case. 
Thus,  where  allotments  had  been  set  out  under  an  inclosure  act,  to  a  party 
claiming  them,  and  possession  given  about  the  year  1817,  but  no  road 
had  been  made  to  them,  nor  any  access  but  through  allotments  made,  or 
land  sold  under  the  act  to  other  persons.  On  motion  in  1829,  for  a  man- 
damus to  the  commissioners,  who  had  not  then  published  their  award,  to 
set  out  an  occupation  road  to  the  first  mentioned  allotments,  the  Court 
held,  that  the  application  came  too  late.(i)  So  the  Court  has  refused  to 
command  a  Court  of  Quarter  Sessions,  touching  the  erection  of  a  road 
gate,  after  a  lapse  of  twenty-six  years  after  the  erection,  leaving  the  pro- 
secutor to  proceed  by  indictment  for  the  nuisance,  or  by  an  action  of  tres- 
pass, if  his  passage  were  obstructed. (r)  So  the  Court  has  refused  an  ap- 
plication for  a  writ  to  command  a  canal  company  to  enrol,  according  to 
their  act  of  Parliament,  certain  contracts,  &c.,  relating  to  certain  lands 
purchased  by  the  company,  after  a  lapse  of  sixty-five  years  from  the  time 
of  such  purchase,  during  which  no  applicaiton  had  been  made  to  the  com- 
pany.((/)  So  the  Court  has  refused  an  application  for  a  writ  to  make  a 
rate  to  reimburse  inhabitants  on  whom  a  fine  has  been  levied  for  non- 


(x\  See  ante,  p.  32,  n.  (/),  87,  n.  {j). 

ly)  See  ante,  p.  287,  n.  \a),  (6J,  supra,  n.  {t).  In  re  Lodge,  2  A.  &  E.  124,  n.  (6)  ; 
3  A.  &  E.  286,  n.  ((f). 

(z)  See  post,  tit.  "  Costs." 

(rt)  Ante,  p.  290,  n.  {v).  R.  v.  Leeds  Canal,  11  A.  k  E.  321.  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D. 
174.  R.  V.  Chesh.  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  114,  M.  C.  R.  t.  Derbysh.  (J.),  Nolan,  29. 
R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  1  G.  &  D.  706.  S.  C.  6  Jur.  506.  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  80, 
M.  C.  See  the  several  titles  of  this  Work  as  to  whom  the  application  in  each  case 
is  to  be  made. 

{h)  Ante,  p.  290,  n.  (i'),  and  supra,  n.  {a).  R.  v.  Cockermouth  Enclosure,  1  B.  & 
Ad.  378,  380.  R.  v.  Stainforth  Caual,  1  M.  &  S.  32.  R.  v.  Ellis,  2  D.,  N.  S.  361. 
R.  V.  McKay,  4  B.  &  C.  658.  R.  v.  Lancash.  (J.),  12  East,  365,  370.  R.  v.  St. 
Paul's  Parish,  1  M.  &  R.  596.     Ex  parte  Scott,  8  D.  329. 

(c)  R.  V.  Cambridgesh.  (J.),  1  D.  &  R.  325.     See  tit.  "Highway"  (Toll). 

\d)  Ante,  p.  60,  n.  (a). 


ArrLICATION,    ETC.  341 

repair  of  a  highway,  after  an  interval  of  eight  years.(c)  So  the  Court 
will  refuse  the  writ,  if  the  parties  who  apply  have  been  guilty  of  great 
negligence  or  laches,  or  *whcrc  one  of  the  applicants  only  is  in  r*9g9-| 
fault.(/)  But  where  after  the  assessment  by  a  jury,  under  a  local 
act,  and  during  a  dispute  of  title,  three  years  elapsed,  such  a  lapse  was 
held  to  be  no  ground  for  refusing  the  writ.(</) 

The  Court  will  require  greater  promptness  in  the  application,  if  the 
applicants  have  another  remedy,  but  which  may  not  be  so  efficacious  as 
the  writ,  as  by  ejectment. (//)  If,  however,  the  application,  under  all  the 
circumstances  of  the  case,  be  not  made  within  a  rcamnaUe  time,  but  the 
delay  is  accounted  for,  the  Court  will  grant  the  rule.(/) 

.]     Affidavits  in  support,  when  necessar)/. — In  a  matter  of  right, 

as  for  instance,  where  a  mandamus  is  prayed  to  restore  a  man,  &c.,  the 
Court  does  not  require,  although  it  is  usually  supplied  with,  an  affidavit 
of  the  fact ;  but  where  the  writ  is  asked  upon  a  supposed  failure  of  duty, 
then  the  Court  requires  an  affidavit ;{]')  for  such  a  writ  is  never  granted 
merely  for  asking,  some  reason  must  be  assigned  for  it,(/.-)  which  is  done 
by  the  disclosure  of  a  sufficient  case  upon  affidavits. (?) 

.]      What  they  should  contain. — The  affidavit  should  plainly  state 

in  what  official  capacity,  if  any,  it  is  intended  the  writ  should  issue  against 
the  defendants,  (jk)  They  should  also  set  forth  the  whole  facts  of  the 
case,  in  order  that  the  Court  may  see  that  the  prosecutor  is  entitled  r*293"l 
to  the  writ;(n)  that  is,  what  duty,  &c.  has  been  *neglected,(o)  *- 

(e)  R.  v.  Lancash.  (J.),  12  East,  366.  And  see  R.  v.  Stainforth  Canal,  1  M.  &  S. 
32,  where  it  was  held,  that  the  apjilication  to  command  a  comiu'usation  must  be 
made  within  a  remonahle  time. 

(  f)  See  supra,  n.  (6),  (c),  (r7),  (e).  R.  v.  Fowey,  4  D.  &  R.  MO.f  S.  C.  3  B.  & 
C.  584.f     R.  V.  Evesham  (Mayor),  8  A.  &  E.  2T0.t     S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  351. 

{g)  R.  V.  Deptford  Pier,  I  P.  &  D.  128.     S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  OlO.f 

(//)  R.  v.  Stainforth  Canal,  1  M.  &  S.  32.     See  ante,  p.  18—27,  290,  n.  {v). 

[i)  1  M.  &  S.  33,  supra,  n.  [h).  R.  v.  Fowey  (Mayor),  4  D.  &  R.  HO.f  S.  C.  3 
B.  &  C.  584.t     S.  C.  5  D.  &  R.  CU.f 

(.;■)  Ante,  p.  167,  n.  (x),  193,  n.  [t).  R.  v.  Cory,  3  Salk.  230,  6.  R.  v.  Cutlers' 
Company,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  129.  See  tit.  "  AfBdavits,"  post,  as  to  general  form  of  affi- 
davits. 

As  to  the  necessary  affidavits  in  each  particular  case,  see  the  several  subjects  of 
the  Alphabetical  Series.  As  to  filing  affidavits,  see,  post,  tit.  "  Affidavits"  (Fil- 
ing). 

{k)  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  1  T.  R.  425,  426.  R.  v.  Palmer,  8  East,  425.  R.  t. 
Buller,  8  East,  392.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (E.)  R.  v.  Luton  Roads  Trustees,  I 
G.  &  D.  251.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  860.f  R.  v.  Manchester  Railway,  1  G.  &  D.  344.  R. 
V.  Excise  Commissioners,  2  T.  R.  381.  R.  v.  London  (Maj'or),  2  T.  R.  177.  R.  t. 
Griffiths,  5  B.  &  A.  731.f  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Bristol  (Mayor),  1  D.  &  R.  389.f  Anon., 
2  Barn.  236. 

The  formal  requisites  and  general  matters  incident  to  all  affidavits  relating  to 
mandamus  will  be  found  treated,  post,  tit.  "Affidavits." 

[1]  4  D.  &  R.  137.t     R.  V.  Fowey  (Mayor). 

{m)  Papillon's  case.  Skin.  64.  R.  t.  West  Looe,  3  B.  &  C.  685.f  S.  C.  5  D.  & 
R.  592.t     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (F.)     See  post,  tit.  "  Affidavits." 

(n)  R.  v.  King's  Lynn  (J.),  3  B.  &  C.  147.f  R.  \.  Nottingham  "Waterworks,  1 
N.  &  P.  480.t  S.  C."  6  A.  &  E.  355.  S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  166.  R.  v.  Trinity  House, 
9  D.  565. 

(o)  R.'v.  North  Riding  (J.),  2  B.  k  C.  290.1  S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  SlO.f  R.  v.  Eastern 
Counties  Railway,  10  A,  &  E.  557.t     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.     See  post,  tit.  "  Writ." 


342  tapping's    mandamus. 

or  omitted  ;(7))  but  they  will  be  sufficient,  if  they  show  no  more  than  a 
probable  cause  or  necessity  for  it. (5)  If  the  affidavits  do  not  disclose  the 
existence  of  such  a  necessity  for  the  writ,  the  Court  will  dismiss  the  ap- 
plication. Thus  in  a  case  in  which,  by  agreement  between  the  parties, 
an  application  was  made  for  a  mandamus,  merely  with  the  view  to  obtain 
the  opinion  of  the  Court,  whether  on  the  construction  of  a  private  act  of 
Parliament,  the  proceeding  by  mandamus  was  a  proper  one ;  the  Court 
stopped  the  argument,  and  refused  to  give  any  decision,  because  where 
there  is  a  doubt  as  to  the  mode  of  proceeding  under  an  act  of  Parliament, 
the  parties  must  act  on  their  own  responsibility,  and  not  come  and  ask 
advice  from  the  Court,  which  is  not  bound  to  give  them  directions,  before 
a  matter  is  properly  ripe  for  judicial  determination. (r)  Public  justice 
and  public  convenience,  should  be  the  ground  of  the  application,  and  the 
Court  will  not  interfere,  unless  for  the  purpose  of  redressing  some  serious 
inconvenience. (s) 

The  prosecutor  must,  by  his  affidavits,  shew  his  title  to  the  writ,  and 
support  his  case,  with  the  best  evidence  in  his  power,  or  the  Court  will 
refuse  the  application  for  the  rule ;(/)  thus  where  the  application  has  rela- 
tion to  a  corporation  by  prescription,  &c.,  the  constitution  of  it,  as  well 
as  the  applicant's  right,  must  be  verified  by  affidavit  ;(z<)  also  when 
moving  on  behalf  of  any  private  corporation,  care  should  be  taken  to  en- 
sure the  production  to  the  Court  of  the  charter,  &c.,  or  a  copy  of  it,  with 
the  affidavit  of  its  verification,  if  necessary,  for  the  Court  cannot  take 
notice  of  such  a  corporation,  without  being  duly  informed  thereof.(z;) 
Thus  in  one  case  the  Court  required  the  statutes  of  a  college,  although 
it  appeared  by  affidavit,  that  application  had  been  made  to  the  college  to 
inspect  the  statutes,  and  take  a  copy  which  had  been  refused  ;(w)  for  as 
the  Court  requires  him  who  calls  for  its  extraordinary  interposition,  and 
upon  whom  the  onus  lies,  to  remove  any  doubts  it  may  have,  before  it 
will  accede  to  the  application, (.r)  so  it  is  not  incumbent  on  those  who 
r*OQ  n  ^^^^  cause  against  a  rule  for  a  mandamus  *to  prove  that  the  pro- 
L  -'  ceedings  have  been  strictly  regular,  or  that  the  prosecutor  is  not 
entitled,  therefore  the  Court  will  not  grant  the  writ  if  the  applicant  do  not 
shew  by  his  own  statement  of  the  case,  that  an  injustice  has  been  done  to 

{p)  R.  V.  Surrey  (J.),  2  Show.  14.     R.  v.  Carter,  4  T.  R.  246. 

(ry)  Auto,  p.  193  n.  {>■).  R.  v.  LoiidoQ  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  333.  R.  v.  Fowey  (Mayor), 
4  D.  k  R.  137.t     S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  50.t     S.  C.  5  D.  &  R.  GM.f 

(r)  R.  V.  Blackw-all  Railwaj',  9  D.  558. 

h)  R.  V.  Portsmouth  (.Mayor),  3  B.  &  0.  lo^.f     S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  V67.f 

(t)  See  ante,  p.  56,  n.  (n),  87,  n.  (k),  212,  n.  (z),  {a).  Anon.,  2  Barn.  437.  R. 
V.  Litchfield  (Ep.),  2  Barn.  365.  See  tit.  "Manor"  (Admission). 

As  to  tlie  necessary  quality  of  the  prosecutor's  right,  see  ante,  p.  27,  28. 

(m)  Vintners'  Company's  case,  Bull.  N.  P.  200.  But  see  R.  v.  Nottingham,  (Mayor), 
Say.  36  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  204,  as  to  form  of  allegation  in  writ.  R.  v.  Devizes,  Bull.  N. 
P.  195,  204. 

(r)  3  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (A).  And  see  R.  v.  Wheeler,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  99.  Case 
of  AHntncrs'  Company,  Bull.  N.  P.  196,  200. 

{w)  R.  V.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  7  Mod.  220. 

[x]  R.  V.  Customs  (Collector  of  Loudon),  1  M.  &  S.  256.     See  infra,  n.  (2). 


APPLICATION,     ETC.  343 

hlm.(^)  Thus  when  the  application  is  made  in  respect  of  an  office  not 
known  to  the  law,  the  nature  of  the  ofl&cc  and  duties  of  the  officer,  should 
be  specially  shewn  upon  the  affidavits,  otherwise  the  Court  will  dismiss 
the  application. (~) 

The  applicant  must  also  shew  by  his  affidavits,  that  he  has  complied 
with  all  the  requisites,  preliminary,  and  necessary,  to  the  obtaining  of  the 
writ.(«)  Thus  where  the  minister  of  an  endowed  dissenting  meeting- 
house had  been  expelled  by  a  majority  of  the  congregation,  the  Court 
refused  a  mandamus  to  restore  him,  applied  for  in  order  to  enable  him  to 
justify  his  conduct,  because  it  did  not  appear  he  had  complied  with  all 
the  requisites  necessary  to  give  him  a  prima  facie  title.(6) 

The  applicant  must  also,  by  his  affidavits,  shew  the  Court's  jurisdiction 
over  the  subject-matter  of  the  application  ;(c)  that  he  has  no  specific  legal 
remedy, (<?)  and  that  there  has  been,  if  necessary,  a  demand  and  refusal, 
previously  to  the  making  of  the  application. (e) 

,]  Renewing. — Where  an  application  for  a  mandamus  has  failed, 

the  Court  has  the  power  of  allowing  such  application  to  be  renewcd,(/) 
as  upon  amended  affidavits  stating  a  demand  and  refusal,(^)  or  where 
♦after  inspection,  &c.,  or  because  the  mandamus  is  defective,  it  is  p^^nnr-i 
desirable  to  commence  the  proceedings  de  novo.(^.)  But  in  a  case  L  ■' 
where  a  second  application  has  been  made,  without  reference  to  former 
proceedings,  and  a  second  rule  nisi  obtained  on  fresh  affidavits,  the  Court 
notwithstanding  the  merits  of  the  case  had  been  discussed  on  the  previous 
motion,  refused  to  hear  it.(t) 

(?/)R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  180.     See  ante,  p.  292,  n.  [1). 

(z)  Ante  p.  186,  n.  (/").     See  tit.  "Ashburton"  (Eight  Men  of). 

(a)  Ante,  p.  27,  28.  "  II.  v.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  5  D.  &  R.  SOO.f  S.  C.  3  B.  &  C. 
677.1  R.  V.  London  Railway,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  42,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Radnorsh.  (J.)  15  L. 
J.,  N.  S.  151,  M.  C.     See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration,  Application.) 

(6)  See  ante,  p.  27,  28.  R.  v.  Jotham,  3  T.  R.  575.  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  1265. 
S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  300,  352.  S.  C.  Andr.  24.  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration,  Applica- 
tion.) 

(c)  Ante,  p.  10 — 12.     See  post,  tits.  ''  Affidavits,"  "  "Writ"  (Averments). 

{d)  See  ante,  p.  18—27.  R.  v.  Clear,  4  B.  &  C.  899.  901.t  S.  C.  7  D.  &  R.  393. 
R.  v.  Clapham,  1  Wils.  305.  R.  v.  Westowe,  (Mayor,)  5  A.  &  E.  788.1  S.  0.  1  N.  &  P. 
222.1  R.  v.  Stoke  Damerel  (Minister),  1  N.  &  P.  59.t  S.  C.  5  A.  &  E.  584.f  R.  v. 
St.  Katherine's  Dock,  4  B.  &  Ad.  3C2.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  121.t  R.  v.  Canterbury 
( Archbp.),  8  East,  213.  R.  v.  Bristowe,  6  T.  R.  168,  169.  R.  v.  England  (Bank),  2 
Doug.  524.  R.  V.  Nottingham  Water  Works,  6  A.  &  E.  372.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  481.t 
R.  V.  Wyndliam,  Cowp.  378. 

(f)  See  ante,  p.  282,  n.  (a),  285  n.  [l),  287,  n.  (y),  and  post,  tit.  "  Writ." 

(/)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  12  East  117.  R.  v.  Deptford  Pier,  8  A.  &E.  917.1  R. 
V.  St.  Prancras,  3  A.  &  E.  544.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222.f  R.  v.  East  Lancasb.  Railway, 
16L.  J.,  N.  S.  125,  Q.  B. 

As  to  renewing  an  application  for  an  ordinary  rule,  see  Chit.  Prac.  1426. 

{g)  Ante,  p.  282.  Ex  parte  Carlton  High  Dale  (Inhabs.),  4  N.  &  M.  313.f  But 
see  Ex  parte  Thompson,  6  Q.  B.  72 1. f  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  176,  Q.  B.  contra.  R.  v. 
Deptford  Pier,  8  A.  &  E.  910,  giS.f  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  128.  See  post,  tit.  "  Writ" 
(Averment).     As  to  demand  and  refusal,  see  p.  282 — 287. 

(A)  R.  v.  Nottingham,   1  W  Blac.  58.     London  (City)  v.  Swallow,  2  Keb.  76. 

{i)  R.  v.  Pickles,  3  Q.  B.  599.f  S.  C.  12  L  J.,  N.  S.  40,  Q.  B.  cited  in  5  Q.  B. 
599. f  The  ruling  iu  Sherry  v.  Oke,  3  D.  349,  is  questionable.  Levy  v.  Coyle, 
12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  295,  Q.  B. 


344  tatping's    mandamus. 

The  general  rule  on  this  subject  is,  that  where  the  applicant  fails  from 
incompleteness  in  his  affidavits,  the  Court  will  not  grant  a  writ  on  fresh 
affiJavits  supplying  the  defect ;  (J)  and  the  only  exceptions  to  the  rule 
which  the  Court  will  generally  admit,  are  where  the  amendment  consists 
merely  in  correcting  an  error  in  the  title  or  jurat  of  an  affidaYit,(7i)  which 
rule  applies  to  public  officers  as  well  as  individuals. (?)  The  Court  ^vill, 
however,  sometimes  exercise  its  discretionary  power  and  enlarge  a  rule,  in 
order  to  give  the  applicant  an  opportunity  to  file  supplemental  affidavits. (m) 
So,  in  a  case  where  a  writ  was  quashed,  on  the  ground  that  it  was  not 
drawn  up  in  conformity  with  the  rules  under  which  it  had  issued,  and  a 
rule  was  afterwards  obtained  for  amending  the  first-mentioned  rules,  so  as 
to  make  them  agree  with  the  mandamus  which  was  discharged,  it  was 
held,  that  the  prosecutor  ought  to  be  allowed  to  make  a  second  applica- 
tion on  the  same  affidavits,  for  a  rule  for  a  mandamus  in  the  terms  of  the 
first  mandamus,  though  the  object  of  such  application  might  be  the  same 
as  that  which  was  sought  by  the  rule  for  amending  the  rules. (n) 

3rd.  Rule.]  Moiv  ohtained  ^  Motion  for. — A  rule  of  the  Court  for  a 
mandamus  can  only  be  obtained  on  motion,  (o)  and  must  be  made  by 
pj-9Qr.-i»*coun5el  in  open  Court  in  Term,(  j:))  supported  by  the  necessary 
'affidavits,  statutes,  and  documents. (^) 

.]     To  what   Court. — The  motion  is  usually  made  in  the  Bail 


Court  at  "Westminster,  but  the  Judge  there  presiding  will,  in  cases  of 
difficulty,  direct  it  to  be  made  in  the  full  Court. (?•)  At  the  time  of  the 
passing  of  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,(,s)  the  Court  of  B.  R.  at  Westminster, 
the  Courts  of  Sessions  of  the  Counties  Palatine,  and  the  Courts  of  Grand 
Sessions  at  Wales,  had  severally  power  to  issue  the  writ,  and  conseduently 
to  entertain  an  application  for  it.  Subsequently,  however,  by  stat.  11 
Geo.  4  and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  70,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  Sessions  of 

(/)  R.  V.  Great  Western  Railway,  1  D.  &  M.  4T1.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.,  59V.f  S.  C. 
13  L.  J.,  X.  S.  129,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Manchester  Railway,  8  A.  &  E.  413.f  S.  C.  3  N. 
&  P.  439,  impugning  3  D.  349. 

{k)  5  Q.  B.  597.t     S.  C.  1  D.  &  M.  471. 

{I)  Supra,  n.  (z). 

hn)  Doyle  v.  Douglas,  4  B.  &  Ad.  554.f     See  post,  p.  301. 

\n\  R.  V.  East  Lancash.  Railway,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  127,  Q.  B. 

(o)  Ante,  p.  5,  n.  [k).  R.  v.  Excise  Commissioners,  2  T.  R.  385.  R.  v.  Croydon 
(Churchwardens),  5  T.  R.  714.     Anon.,  2  Barn.  235,  237. 

It  is  often  of  importance,  where  the  writ  is  granted  by  the  Court  in  the  first 
instance,  either  to  proceed  to  an  election  upon  a  vacancy,  or  to  swear  and  admit 
churchwnrdens,  or  where  more  than  the  proper  number  of  persons  are  elected,  on 
account  of  adverse  claims  and  disputed  rights,  to  have  the  writ  of  mandamus  pre- 
viously drawn,  engrossed,  and  ready  for  delivery  immediately  upon  the  granting  of 
the  rule.     Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  182. 

As  to  requesting  the  Court  to  insert  in  the  rule  the  way  or  manner  such  rule  is 
to  be  served,  see  infra,  "Rule"  (Service). 

{p)  R.  v.  Heathcode,  10  Mod.  62,  per  Parker,  C.  J.  Anon.,  2  Earn.  236.  R.  v. 
Eye  (Mayor),  9  A.  &  E.  676.1 

{q)  Ante,  p.  5,  n.  (/c),  292,  n.  (k),  {I). 

\r\  Ante,  p.  5,  n.  [k). 

(s)  See  stat.  App.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  Ajip. 


ArrLICATION,     ETC. 


345 


the  County  Palatine  of  Chester,  and  the  Courts  of  Grand  Sessions  in 
Wales,  were  respectively  abolished,  and  replaced  by  those  of  the  Superior 
Courts  at  Westminster;  so  that,  at  this  day,  the  only  Courts  whereby 
this  writ  is  granted,  are  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  at  Westminster,  and 
the  Courts  of  the  Counties  Palatine.(0  The  writ  is  now  very  seldom 
applied  for  but  at  Westminster,  for  a  writ  there  obtained,  and  signed 
at  the  Crown  OflSee,  runs  into  and  has  effect  within  the  counties  pal- 
tine.  (») 

At  Westminster,  the  Court  of  B.  B.  has  the  exclusive  power  of  dispen- 
sing the  prerogative  writ  of  mandamus,  and  its  authority  for  so  doing  is, 
that  it  is  the  highest  Court  in  this  kingdom  for  the  preservation  of  the 
peace,  and,  therefore,  has  several  exclusive  privileges,  of  which  the  power 
of  awarding  such  writ  is  one.(y) 

The  writ  of  mandamus  being  of  a  high  prerogative  nature,  (breve  rc- 
gium),  no  place  is  privileged  from  its  jurisdiction  ^(^r)  it  therefore  runs 
into  places  which  have,  for  other  purposes,  a  distinct  and  exclusive  juris- 
diction, as  the  precinct  of  the  cathedral  church  of  Norwich, (.r)  or  a  county 
palatine.  Thus  where  to  a  writ  of  mandamus  issued  at  Westminster,  the 
defendants  returned  that  they  were  a  corporation  in  *the  county  of  [-*297] 
Lancaster,  which  is  a  county  palatine,  and  then  alleged  that,  there- 
fore, they  were  not  compellable  to  answer  in  the  Court  of  B.  B.;  such 
last-mentioned  Court  fined  the  mayor  who  made  the  return  100  marks, 
and  cited  the  case  of  the  Bishop  of  Durham,  who  had  been  fined  1000 
marks  for  the  same  cause. (^)  So,  the  claim  of  cognizance  as  to  the  elec- 
tion of  Alderman  by  the  Court  of  Mayor  and  Aldermen  of  London,  does 
not  exclude  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  B.  B.,  to  issue  a  manda- 
mus. (-) 

.]      When  granted;   JVisi. — If  the  right  to  the  writ  be  clear, 

especially  where  the  prosecutor  is  entitled  to  it  ex  debito  justitiro,  the 
Court  will  grant  a  rule  nisi,  although  there  may  be  no  precedent  of  a  rule 
having  been  granted  in  consimili  casu ;  for  where  there  is  a  right,  law 
and  justice  require  there  should  be  some  remedy  ;(a)  also  as  each  new 
case  as  it  arose  must  have  been  without  precedent,(Z>)  so  the  Court  will 
not  now  allow  itself  to  be  fettered  in  the  exercise  of  its  power  of  dis- 

(0  See  Stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  App.  («)  See  infra,  n.  (y). 

[v)  Ante,  p.  9,  10,  n.  (b)  ;  3  Bi.  Com.  110;  3  Steph.  Com.  G81.  Awdley's  case, 
1  Poph.  176.  Hughs  t.  Hughs,  1  Keb.  354,  per  Twysden,  J.,  and  Athow's  case 
there  cited. 

The  writ  in  Middlcton's  case,  2  Dyer,  332  b,  issued  from  the  Court  of  B.  R.,  per 
Doderidge,  J.,  in  Awdlcy  v.  Joy,  Toph.  176.  S.  C.  Latch.  123,— notwithstanding 
the  report  in  2  Dyer,  332"  b,  states  that  it  issued  from  the  Court  of  C.  B. 

(w)  R.  V.  Patrick,  1  Keb.  610. 

he)  Lidlcston  r.  Exeter  (Mayor),  Comb.  422.  R.  v.  Winchelsea  (Corp.),  2  Lev. 
85.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (A.) 

(?/) .  Wiggon  (Mayor),  1  Sid.  92.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  4. 

(z)  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  4  M.  &  R.  36.     S.  C.  9  B.  &  C.  21.t 

(a)  Ante,  p.  9.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  Burr.  1660,  per  Wilmot,  J.  R.  v.  Pag- 
ham  Sewers,  8  B.  &  C.  359.t 

(6)  R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  55.     S.  C.  1  Wils.  2G6. 


346  tapping's    mandamus. 

ponsing  justice,  by  being  told  that,  in  ancient  time,  such  a  writ  would 
not  have  been  granted  :(c)  on  the  other  hand,  the  Court  will  in  its  dis- 
cretion consider,  before  the  defendant  is  put  to  the  expense  of  answering 
the  application,  whether  or  not  it  will  be  proper  to  grant  a  rule  to  shew 
cause. ((/) 

The  Court  will  not  grant  a  rule  in  the  alternative  cither  for  a  manda- 
mus or  a  quo  warranto. (e) 

The  principles  of  law  which  govern  the  dispensation  of  the  writ, 
have  been  treated  of  in  Chapter  3,  p.  9,  to  which  the  reader  is  re- 
ferred. 

.]     Absolute  ill  the  Jirst  instance.^/) — The  Court  has  the  power 

of  granting  a  rule  absolute  in  the  first  instance,  and  will,  in  general,  do 
so,  when  such  a  course  will  advance  the  justice  of  the  case,  or  the  facts 
have  reference  to  annual  or  municipal  ofl&ces.  Thus,  in  a  case  to  compel 
the  payment  of  money  for  the  support  of  paupers,  or  to  make  a  poor 
rate,(f7)  or  to  compel  the  reception  by  overseers  of  poor  of  a  deserted 
r*OQQ-|  *child,(/<)  the  rule  is  absolute  in  the  first  instance.  So  is  a  rule 
for  a  mandamus  to  allow  a  poor's  rate,(/)  or  to  go  to  the  election 
of  a  mayor,(y)  or  of  annual  municipal  officers,  especially  if  the  provi- 
sions of  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  s.  5,  have  been  complied  with.(/r) 

The  court  will  also  grant  a  rule  absolute  in  the  first  instance  in  all 
cases  where  the  object  of  the  writ  is  to  admit  or  swear  into  an  office,  pro- 
vided the  right  appear  plain. (^)  Thus,  it  has  been  granted  in  the  first 
instance,  for  a  mandamus  to  command  the  archdeacon  or  other  official  to 
swear  in  a  party  as  churchwarden,  chapelwarden,  or  sidesman,  on  an  affi- 
davit of  due  election,  demand,  and  refusal,  and  of  notice  to  the  archdea- 
con, &c.  of  the  application  to  the  Court;  the  ground  of  refusal  need  not 
however  appear  by  the  affidavit  in  support  of  the  rule.(m)  So,  as  to 
overseers  of  the  poor,(?i)  notwithstanding  other  parties  claim  to  have 


(c)  R.  T.  Fowey  (Mayor),  2  B.  &  C.  SOS.f  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  132.t  S.  C.  5  D.  & 
R.  G14.t 

{d)  R.  V.  London  (Ep.),  13  East,  423. 

(e)  R.  T.  Leeds  (Mayor),  11  A.  &  E.  512  ;f  5  Jur.  548. 

(/)  As  to  whether  a  rule  is  absolute  in  the  first  instance,  or  nisi  merely,  see  the 
several  titles  throughout  the  Alphabetical  Series. 

{g)  Ante,  p.  5,  6,  218,  n.  (r) ;  Bull.  X.  P.  195.  R.  v.  St.  Andrew's,  T  A.  &  E. 
281  ;t  and  n.  [a).  R.  v.  Edlaston  (Churchwardens),  1  N.  &  P.  20.t  R.  v.  Canter- 
bury (Archbp.),  15  East,  133,  146;  6  T.  R.  490.  R.  v.  Eye  (Mayor),  9  A.  &  E. 
C76.t  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  348.  S.  C.  8  L.  J.,  N.  S.  142,  Q.  B.  See  ante,  tit.  "  Poor" 
(Relief  Rate.) 

[h]  Ex  parte  Foundling  Hospital,  5  D.  T22.     Sec  tit.  "  Poor"  (Relief,  &c.) 

\i)  R.  V.  Fisher,  Say.  IGO. 

{j)  R.  V.  Heydon,  Say.  208,  which  is  the  first  case  where  it  was  so  granted. 

{k)  See  stat.  App.,  and  ante,  p.  56,  n.  {p).     See  tit.  "  Corporation  Municipal." 

{I)  Anon.,  Chit.  254 ;  Bull.  N.  P.  199  b.  See  tit.  "  Churchwardens"  (Swearing 
in,  Rule),  "  Office"  (Admission,  Rule.) 

{m)  Ex  parte  Winfield,  3  A.  &  E.  614.f  R.  \.  Litchfield  (Archdeacon),  5  X.  & 
M.  42.1     S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  463.     Ex  parte  Penruddock,  1  H.  &  W.  347. 

(rt)  R.  V.  Manchester,  7  D.  707. 


APPLICATION,     ETC. 


347 


been  olectecl.(o)     But  wliere  the  writ  is  to  'h-edore,"  the  practice  is,  first 
to  grant  a  rule  to  shew  cause,  (p) 

In  other  cases,  it  is  also  the  practice  of  the  Court  to  grant  the  rule 
absolute  in  the  first  instance,  as  where  the  rule  is  for  a  writ  to  enforce 
the  granting  of  probate,(</)  or  to  admit  the  freedom  of  a  municipal  cor- 
poration,(r)  or  to  allow  an  inhabitant  of  a  parish  to  inspect  parish  books,(s) 
or  a  copyholder  to  inspect  the  manorial  rolls.(0  Formerly,  the  writ 
issued  in  the  first  instance  in  all  cases  where  its  object  was  to  enforce  obe- 
dience to  acts  of  Parliament,  charters,  or  letters-patent ;(«)  but  at  this 
day  some  specific  ground,  as  urgency,  &e.,  must  be  shewn,  in  order  to 
prevent  the  rule  being  nisi,  because  it  gives  an  opportunity  to  answer  the 
application,  and  may  prevent  unnecessary  costs. (<') 

.]      Eoio   oltained. — The    rule,    whether   absolute   in    the   first 

instance,  or  merely  nisi,  is   drawn   up  by  the    Master  in   the  Crown 
Office,  (io) 

* .]     Form  of  Rule. — The  Court  will,  in  difficult  or  doubt-  j-^.^ggn 

ful  cases,  and  in  cases  within  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  suggest  the  L  -     J 
form  of  the  rule,(a;)  in  which  case  the  rule  should  follow  the  suggestion. 

Any  number  of  persons  may  be  included  in  one  rule  and  writ,  if  they 
are  bound  to  execute  it,  or  if  they,  in  their  official  capacity,  form  but  one 
corporation,  as  churchwardens  and  sidesmen. (?/) 

A  single  rule  for  several  writs  of  mandamus  is  irregular ;  so,  a  rule  to 
shew  cause  why  "  one  or  more"  writs  of  mandamus  should  not  issue,  is  an 
improper  form  of  rule.  (2) 

The  rule  must  be  properly  directed,  or  the  Court  may  refuse  to  make 
it  absolute. (a)  It  need  not,  however,  specify  the  name  of  the  defendant, 
if  an  officer,  it  is  sufficient  if  he  be  designated  by  his  official  appellation  ',{h') 

(0)  Ex  parte  Duffield,  3  A.  &  E.  GlT.f 

Ip)  Bull.  N.  p.  199.  See  Mayor  of  Truro,  2  Chit.  257.1  lUcbester's  case.  Id. 
n.  {a).  R.  T.  Coventry  (Mayor),  3  Doug.  23G.  See  tit.  "  Office"  (Restoration, 
Rule). 

(q)  Justice  V.  Jones,  1  Barn.  280.  S.  0.  nom.  R.  v.  Battesworth.  See  tit. 
"Will." 

(r)  R.  V.  Coventry  (Mayor),  3  Doug.  236.     See  tit.  "  Freedom." 

(.5)  Anon.,  2  Chit.  200.f  But  see  R.  v.  Arnold,  4  A.  &  E.  657.1  See  tit.  "Parish 
Books"  (Rolls,  Inspection). 

it)   1  R.  G.,  IL,  2  Wm.  4,  s.  102.     See  tit.  "Manor"  (Inspection). 

[u)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  180.  (i-)  R.  v.  Arnold,  4  A.  &  E.  659.f 

(w)  Imp  on  Mandamus,  115. 

ix)  R.  v.  Bedford  (Corp.),  1  East,  80.  R.  v.  Bridgewater  (Corp.),  3  Doug.  382.f 
R.  V.  Canterbury  (Archbp.),  15  East,  121.  R.  v.  Newsham,  Say.  211.  R.  v.  BuUer, 
8  East,  392.     See  stats.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  as  to  Ireland,  in 

The  general  requisites  of  the  rule  are  the  same  as  those  of  ordinary  rules  of 
Court;  see  Chit.  Prac.  p.  1410. 

(y)  See  ante,  p.  290,  n.  (</),  (r),  (.s-)-  R.  v.  Middlesex  (Archdeacon),  3  A.  &  E. 
G15.t     S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  494.t 

[z]  R.  V.  Bridgenorth  (Mayor),  2  P.  &  D.  317.  S.  C.  10  A.  &  E.  70  ;t  3  Jur.  384. 
R.  V.  Chester  (Mayor),  3  Salk.  230. 

(a)  R.  V.  Ely  (Ep.),  2  T.  R.  327.     R.  v.  Ipswich  (Bailiffs),  2  Salk.  434,  16. 

As  to  how  the  writ  should  be  directed,  see  post,  tit.  "  Writ"  (Direction). 

(6)  R.  V.  Carmarthen  (Corp.),  4  Jur.  3G5.     And  see  Bull.  N.  P.  199,  200. 


348  tapping's    mandamus. 

which  latter  is  the  preferable  course,  as  it  obviates  any  inconvenience  that 
may  arise  from  the  personal  change  of  such  office. (r) 

The  bo(.ly  of  the  rule  should  be  expressed  in  definite  terms,  or  the  man- 
damus which  must  follow  the  rule  may  be  void  for  generality  or  other- 
wise, and,  therefore,  be  liable  to  be  superseded. (^/)  It  is,  however,  suffi- 
cient if  the  rule  state  the  object  of  the  writ,  it  need  not  specify  the  whole 
mandamus. (e)  When  the  writ  is  to  command  an  election  to  an  office,  the 
subsisting  officer,  or  officer  do  facto  (if  any),  must  be  made  a  party  to^  the 
rule ;(/)  because,  he  being  materially  interested  in  the  event  of  the  ques- 
tion, should  have  an  opportunity  of  protecting  himself. (y)  So,  where  the 
effect  of  the  writ  is  to  deprive  or  oust  a  party  in  possession,  such  party 
should  be  a  party  to  the  rule  and  writ.(7i) 

*Five  days  is  sufficient  time  to  be  given  by  the  rule,  wherein 
[  dUUJ  ^j^g  defendant  is  to  shew  cause  against  it,  and  the  Court  will  not, 
as  a  matter  of  course,  grant  further  time  ;(i)  but  in  a  case  of  difficulty, 
or  where  there  are  several  old  books,  charters,  &c.  to  be  inspected,  it  will 
enlarge  the  time  for  shewing  cause. (j/')  So  on  the  other  hand,  the  Court 
will,  in  cases  of  urgencij,  mention  a  short  day,  as  the  "  next  daij,"  upon 
which  cause  must  be  shewn. (Z:)  But  whatever  the  time  may  be,  it  must 
be  correctly  inserted  in  the  rule. 

It  is  well  in  cases  of  anticipated  difficult  service,  that  counsel  should, 
when  moving  for  the  rule,  ask  the  Court  to  say  what  service  of  the  rule 
it  will  deem  sufficient,  and  to  let  it  form  part  of  the  rule,  as  "  that  notice 
of  the  rule  be  given  to  the  county  justices,  or  some  of  them."(Q 

In  some  cases,(?>i)  the  Court  will  also,  where  the  justice  of  the  ease 
requires  it,  or  it  is  convenient  that  all  third  parties  should  be  before  the 
Court,  order  that  notice  of  the  rule  shall  be  given  to  such  third  parties, 
as  to  the  solicitor  of  the  Treasury,  mayor,  town  clerk,  &c.,  and  that  such 
direction  shall  form  part  of  the  rule.(n) 

.]     Service  of. — If  the  rule  contain  directions  as  to  service,  they 

(c)  See  post,  tit.  "  Writ"  (Direction). 

(fZ)  R.  V.  Liverpool  (Borough),  1  Barn.  82.  R.  v.  Holbechc,  4  T.  R.  119.  See 
the  title  of  a  rule  against  churchwardens,  overseers,  and  inhabitants  of  a  parish; 
R.  v.  St.  Saviour's,  7  A.  &  E.  948,t  n.  [b).  S.  C.  3  K  &  P.  12G.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
496.f     See  post,  tits.  "  Quashing  Writ,"  "  Supersedeas,"  "  Writ." 

(e)  R.  v.  Willes,  7  Mod.  262. 

(/)  Ante,  p.  1C7,  n.  {a).     R.  v.  Banks,  1  W.Blac.  445.     S.  C.  Burr.  1453. 

{(/)  R.  V.  Scawen,  Burr.  1453.  R.  r.  Ricketts,  3  N.  &  P.  153.  S.  C.  10  A.  &  E. 
544.f     And  see  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  s.  3. 

(h)  R.  V.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Mod.  233,  368.  S.  C.  Skin.  359,  368,  393,  546.  S.  C. 
Comb.  237,  279,  282.     S.  C.  Holt,  436.     S.  C.  2  Keb.  168. 

(?)  Canterburj^  (Archbp.)  v.  Trinity  Coll.,  1  Barn.  194.  Sec  infra,  "Enlarging 
Rule." 

(J)  R.  T.  Cambridge  (U.),  8  Mod.  148.     See  tit.  "Return"  (When  to  be  made.) 

a-)  Ante,  p.  295,  n.  {n).     Anon.,  2  Barn.  235. 

(/)  See  ante,  p.  295,  n.  (o).  R.  v.  Tucker,  5  D.  &  R.  434.f  S.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  545, 
546.t     R.  v.  Mildcnhall  Savings'  Bank,  6  A.  &  E.  952,  954.t     S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  278. 

(m)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (U.),  1  W.  Blac.  547.  S.  C.  Burr.  1647  ;  Saj-.  211.  R.  v. 
Bankes,  1  W.  Blac.  444.  S.  C.  Burr.  1452.  R.  v.  Simpson,  1  W.  Blac.  457.  S.  C. 
Burr.  1463.     R.  v.  St.  Peter's,  4  P.  &  D.  252.     S.  C.  12  A.  &  E.  527.t 

(«)  R.  V.  Treasury  Lords,  10  A.  &  E.  375. f     S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  498. 


APPLICATION,    ETC.  349 

musb  be  implicitly  folbwcJ;  if,  however,  there  be  no  such  direction,  as 
a  general  rule,  the  rule  must  be  served  upon  those  to  whom  the  writ  is 
to  be  directed  ;(o)  although  it  may  not  bo  necessary  either  to  serve  the 
copies  personally,  or  to  show  such  original  rule  at  the  time  of  the 
service,  yet  it  is  better  in  all  cases,  where  practicable,  to  serve  the  party 
himself,  and  at  the  same  time  to  produce  and  shew  to  him  the  original 
rulc.Q;) 

.]     Notice  of. — If  the  rule  contain  a  direction  that  a  notice  of  it 

shall  be  given  to  particular  persons,  such  notice  must  be  strictly  given. (g-) 

.]  Affidavit  of  Service,  and  of  JVofice. — Immediately  upon  ser- 
vice of  the  rule,  or  of  notice  given  thereof,  an  affidavit  of  such  service  or 
notice,  should  be  made,  entitled,  and  sworn  in  tbc  same  way  as  the  p^omi 
*affiJavit  to  obtain  the  rule  nisi,  in  order  that  such  rule  may  be  L  ^ 
ultimately  made  absolute. (;) 

.  ]     Enlanjing. — The  Court  has  the  power  to  enlarge  a  rule,  and 

will  do  so,  upon  terms,  if  necessary,  in  order  to  facilitate  the  attainment 
of  justice;  such  an  application  will  be  granted  on  motion,  supported  by 
affidavits  of  the  circumstances,  either  at  the  instance  of  the  prosecutor  ;(.s) 
or  of  the  defendant ;(/)  or  by  consent. («) 

The  specific  circumstances  which  have  induced  the  Court  to  enlarge  a 
rule,  have  been  to  give  an  opportunity  to  hear  an  appeal ;  (w)  or  to  make 
a  necessary  affidavit,  &c.  ;(ip)  or  in  order  to  amend  one. (a:) 

,]     Shewing  Cause;  Jioiv. — The  attorney  for  the  defendant  should, 

previously  to  shewing  cause  against  the  rule,  obtain  from  the  Crown  Office, 
office  copies  of  the  rule,  and  affidavits  upon  which  it  is  founded;  briefs  of 
which  should  be  handed  to  counsel,  together  with  copies  of  such  other 
affidavits,  verified  copies  of  charters  or  other  documents,  as  his  client's 
case  may  admit  of  or  require. (^)     The  original  affidavits  should  be  filed  at 

[o)  Ante,  p.  299,  n.  («) ;  Bull.  N.  P.  195.  K  v.  Clerkcnwell  (Overseers),  8  Geo. 
1,  Bull.  N.  P.  200. 

(p)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  182.  The  rule  should  be  served  before  nine  o'clock  at  night. 
As  to  the  service  of  rules  in  ordinary  cases,  see  Chit.  Prac.  p.  1415. 

[q)  Supra,  n.  (I),  (?»),  («).     And  see  ante,  p.  2G8,  n.  (.s). 

(/■)   Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  182. 

{s)  See  ante,  p.  294,  n.  ( f).  R.  v.  East  India  Company,  4  M.  &  S.  2'78,  279.  P. 
V.  Mirehouse,  2  A.  &  E.  GSS.f  S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  394.f  R.  v.  Dolgelly  Union,  8  A. 
&  E.  563.t  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  542.  R.  v.  Baukes,  1  W.  Blac.  444.  S.  C.  Burr.  1452. 
R.  V.  Simpson,  1  W.  Blac.  457.  S.  C.  Burr.  1463.  In  re  Walsall,  1  H.  &  W.  370.  R. 
V.  Birmingham  Railway,  2  Rail.  Cas.  710.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  47.f  As  to  enlarging 
rules  in  general,  see  Chit.  Prac.  1419. 

(i)  R.  V.  Hungerford  Market,  2  B.  &  Ad.  204,f  («). 

(u)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  Burr.  2008. 

(v)  Ante,  p.  234,  n.  (w).     R.  v.  East  India  Company,  4  M.  &  S.  278,  279. 

(«')  See  ante,  p.  295.     R.  v.  Batcman,  1  N.  &  M.  719.t     S.  C.  4  B.  &  Ad.  552.f 

(z)  Sec  ante,  p.  295,  n.  (j),  [k),  (l).     R.  v.  Warwicksh.  (J.),  5  D.  382. 

{■>/}  Ante,  p.  293,  n.  (y).  [w) ;  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  224.  R.  v.  Rothcrham  (Inhabs.), 
12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  17,  Q.  B. 

By  Sr.  Off.  Rules,  r.  15,  App.,  it  is  ordered,  "  That  copies  of  the  writ  of  manda- 
mus, and  return  and  traverse  or  other  pleadings  thereupon,  and  every  other  proceed- 
ing filed  on  the  Crown  side  of  the  said  Court,  shall,  when  required,  be  made  at  the 
Crown  Office,  and  delivered  to  the  respective  parties  or  other  persons  requiring  the 
same." 


350  TArriNo's    mandamus. 

the  Crown  Office. (x.)  The  counsel  for  the  defendant  must  shew  cause 
against,  on  or  before  the  day  named  therein,  or  on  the  expiration  of  such 
further  time  to  which  it  may  have  been  enlarged.  If,  however,  the  coun- 
sel who  was  to  have  supported  the  rule,  be  absent  on  the  argument,  the 
Court  will  give  judgment;  but  if  counsel  subsequently  attend,  the 
Court  will,  in  its  discretion,  allow  him,  or  not,  to  argue  in  support  of 
it.(«) 

As  to  what  may  be  shewn  as  cause  against  the  rule,  it  has  been  held, 
that  after  the  determination  of  a  point  of  law,  by  the  Court,  upon  a 
r*^091  *™^®  "^^^^  ^^^'  ^  mandamus,  it  cannot  be  again  di.scussed  as  a  special 
case,  &c.,  until  there  shall  have  been  a  return  made  to  the  writ.(&) 
Also  in  shewing  cause  against  a  rule  for  a  second  mandamu.s,  the  defend- 
ants are  precluded  from  contending  that  any  of  the  preliminaries  necessary 
to  sustain  the  first  mandamus  did  not  exist. (c)  Thus  where  a  mandamus 
to  impanel  a  jury  and  to  assess  the  damages  sustained,  had  issued  in  pur- 
suance of  a  compensation  clause  in  a  local  act  of  Parliament,  the  Court, 
upon  the  discussion  of  a  rule  nisi  for  a  second  mandamus  to  enforce  the 
the  payment  of  the  damages  assessed  by  virtue  of  the  first,  would  not 
allow  the  legality  of  the  first  mandamus  to  be  questioned,  for  in  such  a  case 
the  regularity  of  all  proceedings  previously  to  and  at  the  trial,  is  to  be  pre- 
sumed, no  objection  having  been  made  at  the  time  of  trial. (f7) 

.]      Who  may  shew  cause. — The  Court  will,  in  general,  allow  all 

those  against  whom  the  rule  nisi  has  been  granted,  or  upon  whom  it  has 
been  served,  or  have  had  notice  of  it  ;(<?)  or  who  are  legally  interested  in 
the  question,  to  shew  cause.  Thus  on  a  rule  nisi  for  a  mandamus  to  com- 
mand justices  to  enter  continuances  to  hear  an  appeal  against  a  conviction 
under  the  turnpike  acts;  it  was  held  that  it  was  no  objection  to  the 
counsel  appearing  to  shew  cause,  that  they  were  instructed  by  the 
attorney  of  the  trustees  of  the  road,  on  which  the  offence  was  alleged 
to  have  been  committed  by  the  applicant,  and  not  by  the  justice  before 
whom,  or  the  informer  by  whom  the  complaint  was  made,  on  which 
the  conviction  took  place,  and  to  whom  respectively  the  rule  was  ad- 
dressed.(/) 

In  all  cases  within  the  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4,  which  relates  to  mat- 
ters, &e.,  done  in  respect  of  all  offices  other  than  those  provided  for  by 

[z]  Sec  p.  208,  n.  (?<•),  and  post,  tit.  "Affidavits"  (Filing). 

[a]  II.  T.  Hughes,  3  A.  &  E.  429.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  94.+  As  to  ordinary  rules, 
See  Chit.  Prac. 

(i)  R.  V.  Leicester  (J.),  7  D.  &  R.  TOS.f  And  see  7  D.  &  R.  370.+  S.  C.  4  B.  & 
C.  891.-J-     See  post,  tit*.  "  Special  Case." 

(c)  R.  V.  Xottingliam  Old  Waterworks,  G  A.  k  E.  355.f  S.  C.  1  N.  k  P.  480.f 
R.  v.  Brewers  Company,  4  D.  &  R.  492.f     S.  C.  5  M.  &  R.  140,  153. 

{(1)  1  X.  &  P.  480.t     S.  C.  G  A.  k  E.  355,t  supra.     And  sec  1  N.  k  M.  121.f     S. 

C.  4  B.  &  Ad.  3C0,t  where  it  was  objected  that  the  arbitrator  had  not  adjudicated 
upon  one  of  the  matters  in  difference. 

(c)  R.  T.  Treasurer  Lords,  2  P.  k  D.  502,  n.  {a).  See  stats.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  6, 
and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113  (L),  App..  and  ante,  tit.  '-Visitor,"  p.  273,  n.  {b). 

(/)  R.  V.  Middlesex  (J.),  2  D.,  X.  S.  719,  notwithstanding  Johnson  v.  Marriott,  2 

D.  343.     S.  C.  3  Cr.  &  M.  183.* 


APPLICATION,     ETC.  351 

stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  tlic  Court  lias  power  to  require,  that  not  only  those 
to  whomthcwritwillbedircctedjbutalso  that  all  those  who  have  an  interest 
in  the  subject-matter  thereof,  shall  be  heard  against  the  rule  to  shew 
cause. (r/) 

*4th.  Rule  Absolute.]  When  granted. — The  Court  will  ^^^qt 
make  the  rule  absolute  for  a  mandamus,  on  an  affidavit  of  service  L  "^  -• 
if  no  cause  be  shewn  against  it,(/t)  notwithstanding  the  title  of  the  appli- 
cant may  not  appear  clear,  but  even  doubtful ;(/)  because  as  the  rule  for 
the  writ  is  not  conclusive,  but  only  rccjuires  the  doing  of  a  certain  act,  or 
to  shew  cause  why  it  is  not  done,  so  the  defendant  may,  if  he  so  choose, 
raise  an  argument  on  the  return. (_;')  The  Court  is  inclined  tomake  the 
rule  absolute,  if  any  right  be  shewn  on  the  part  of  the  prosecutor  to  that 
which  he  seeks,  or  the  case  be  one  which  the  Court  thinks  worthy  of  ex- 
amination, in  order  that  it  may  be  further  and  more  fully  discussed  on  the 
return,  or  the  evidence  submitted  to  a  jury ;  such  a  course  being  in  all 
cases  taken,  without  determining  whether  a  peremptory  writ  will,  or  not, 
be  ultimately  awarded. (/f)  The  Court  will  thus  make  the  rule  absolute, 
although  the  affidavits  on  which  the  rule  nisi  is  obtained,  contain  misre- 
presentation, scandal  and  also  suppress  certain  facts,  if  sufficient  remain 
unanswered,  to  shew  a  necessity  for  the  writ.(?) 

So,  in  some  cases,  as  to  proceed  to  the  election  of  capital  burgesses,  the 
rule  absolute  is  granted  as  of  course,  unless  some  strong  and  special  rea- 
son to  induce  a  refusal  of  it  be  assigned. (m)  So,  both  a  rule  absolute  for 
a  writ  to  put  the  corporate  seal  to  a  certificate  of  the  election  of  a  re- 
cordcr,(?()  or  to  swear  in  a  corporator,(o)  are  granted  as  of  course. 

The  general  rule  upon  which  the  Court  acts  in  making  the  rule  abso- 
lute, and  granting  the  writ  is,  that  if  the  affidavits  raise  questions  of  dis- 
puted fact,  it  will  grant  the  writ  in  order  that  those  questions  may  be  tried; 
or  if  there  be  questions  of  law  which  ought  to  be  put  into  a  more  solemn 
train  for  inquiry,  a  similar  course  will  be  pursued ;  but  if  the  arguments  on 
both  sides  disclose  that  there  is  no  dispute  as  to  the  facts,  and  the  Court 
has  no  doubt  in  point  of  law,  it  will  not  make  the  rule  absolute. (p)     As 

(r/)  Sec  Stat.  App.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 

(k)  R.  V.  Tucker,  5  D.  &  R.  434.t     S.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  545,  546.t 

(i)  R.  V.  Dr.  Bland,  Bull.  N.  P.  200;  Sid.  169;  1  Lev.  23;  2  Lev.  14  ;  2  Sbovr. 
74;  Carth.  1G9 ;  10  Mod.  49  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (E.) 

(/)  Supra,  n.  («).  R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  4  T.  R.  TOO.  See  post,  tit.  "Return." 

(A)  R.  V.  Bland,  1  Mod.  356;  Bull.  N.  P.  196.  Anon.,  2  Barn.  237.  R.  v.  West 
Looc  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  C.  G83.t     S.  C.  5  D.  &  R.  590.f     S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  ISl.f 

[I)  See  tit.  "  ACQdavit,"  post. 

(m)  R.  V.  Grampond  (Mayor),  G  T.  R.  302.     See  ante,  p.  297,  n.  («),  (!>). 

(/?)  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  4  T.  R.  G99,  700.  See  tit.  "Recorder." 

(o)  4  T.  R.  700,  supra,  n.  (n). 

(p)  R.  V.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  404.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524.t  S.  C.  1  W.  W.  &  D.  94. 
142.  S.  C.  2  Jur.  47.  R.  v.  Bishop's  Stoke,  8  D.  611.  R.  v.  Dr.  Bland,  7  Mod.  355, 
l)er  Lee,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Heathcote,  10  Jlod.  G3,  per  Parker,  C.  J.  S.  C.  Fort.  290  ;  10 
Mod.  63,  49,  53.  R.  v.  New  Coll.,  2  Lev.  14.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  5  B.  &  Ad. 
233,  237,t  and  see  R.  v.  Ld.  Godolpliin,  8  A.  &  E.  344.t     S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  488.t 


352  TATPINa'S     MANDAMUS. 

before  stated,  wherever  there  is  a  fair  doubt,  "'"'either  upon  matter 
[  "oVi]  ^^  £^^.j.^  Q^.  m.^j-tjji.  of  law,  the  Court  will  make  the  rule  absolute, 
in  order  that  it  may  be  properly  discussed  on  the  returu.(f/)  And  even 
although  a  strong  case  of  fraud  be  disclosed, (r)  it  will  direct  a  return,(s) 
especially  where  the  prosecutor  has  no  opportunity  to  right  himself  by 
action,  &c.(^)  So,  the  Court  will  not,  on  motion  and  affidavits,  determine 
a  corporate  question  of  importance,  but  will  direct  the  writ  to  issue,  that 
the  question  may  be  decided  on  the  return ;(?/)  and  the  same  as  to  a  dis- 
puted question  of  title. (/')  So,  where  the  affidavits  of  the  defendant,  in 
shewing  cause,  are  silent  as  to  any  point  which,  if  appearing,  would  an- 
swer the  application,  and  when  the  refusal  of  the  writ  might  work  a  great 
public  incouvcnience,  the  Court  will  make  the  rule  absolute. (/r)  But  the 
Court  will  not,  merely  for  the  sake  of  a  return, (.r)  make  the  rule  for  tbe 
Avrit  absolute ;  as  where  the  defendant's  affidavits  clearly  and  distinctly 
shew  that  the  writ  should  not  issue. (^) 

If  the  defendant's  affidavits  shew  that  the  rule  should  not  have  been 
obtained,  the  Court  will  discharge  it  with  costs.(.~)  So,  if  the  prosecutor 
have  been  guilty  of  laches,  &c.(a) 

If  the  Court  decide  against  the  granting  of  the  writ,  on  the  ground 
that  the  application  should  have  been  for  an  information  in  the  nature  of 
a  quo  warranto,  they  will  sometimes  grant  a  rule  for  the  latter  at  once, 
but,  in  such  case,  will  discharge  the  rule  nisi  for  the  writ  of  mandamus 
with  costs,  (i)  Also  where  a  rule  nisi  for  a  mandamus  has  been  obtained, 
and  the  prosecutor  has  afterwards  obtained  a  rule  for  a  quo  warranto 
against  the  de  facto  officers,  the  Court  will  refuse  to  hear  the  two  rules 
discussed  together,  or  to  discharge  the  rule  for  the  mandamus  as  of 
.^.  course;  but  after  discharging  the  rule  for  the  mandamus  *on  the 
L  ^^  merits,  it  may  make  the  rule  absolute  for  a  quo  warranto. (c)  Nor 
will  the  Court  allow  such  rules  to  be  discussed  together,  although  it 
formed  part  of  the  rule  for  the  quo  warranto,  that  the  motion  should  come 

(q)  R.  V.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  5  D.  &  R.  .^OO.f  S.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  67'7,t  per  Best,  J. 
Auon.,  2  Bcarn.  237  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (A).  R.  v.  Birmingham  (Rector),  7  A. 
&  E.  254  ;t  11  A.  &  E.  27. -f  II.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  57.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  26G  ;  2 
Lev.  14. 

(r)  Goubot  V.  De  Crouy,  1  C.  &  M.  772.*  S.  C.  3  Tyr.  906.  S  C.  2  D.  86,  cited 
in  R.  T.  Round,  5  N.  &  M.  427,t  n.  [b).  S.  C.  4  A  &  E.  ISO.f     S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  546. 

(s)  R.  V.  Jones,  2  Barn.  240.     R.  v.  Litchfield  (Ep.),  2  Barn.  365. 

(l)  R.  V.  Whalley,  Stra.  1139.     S.  C.  7  Mod.  308  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  6. 

(m)  R.  v.  Evcrct,  Cas.  temp.  Hard.  261.     Sec  tit.  "  Corporation"  (Municipal.) 

(r)  R.  V.  Frost,  8  A.  &  E.  825.1     S.  C.  P.  &  D.  75.     See  ante,  p.  297,  n.  (a). 

(w)  R.  V.  Milverton  (Manor),  3  A  &  E.  28G.t    S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  282. 
r  (x)  R.  V.  Suffolk  (J.),  5  N.  &  M.  144.t     S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  725,t  per  Patteson,  J. 

(?/)  Ante,  p.  297,  n.  {<!).  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  5  B.  &  Ad.  233,  237,t  and  see 
R.  V.  Ld.  Godolphin,  8  A.  &  E.  344.f     S.  C.  3  N.  &  p.  438.f 

(z)  R.  V.  Chester  (Ep.),  Cora.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B). 

(a)  R.  Luton  Roads,  1  Q.  B.  8G7,t  n.  (a).     Supra,  p.  292. 

(6)  R.  V.  Colchester  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  259.  R.  v.  Beedle  and  others,  3  A.  &  E. 
475.t     See  post,  tit.  "Costs." 

(c)  R.  V.  Winchester  (Mayor,)  7  A.  k  E.  215.t  S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  525.  S.  C.  1 
Jur  738.     S.  C.  2  N.  k  P.  274;  but  see  6  East,  360. 


APPLICATION,     ETC.  353 

cn  for  argument  at  the  saine  time  -with  the  motion  for  the  manda- 
inv.s.(r/) 

8niiietimc.s  the  Court  will  make  the  rule  absolute,  but  direct  that  no 
Miit  do  i,s«uc,  without  ;iu  order  from  a  Judge  for  that  purpose. (c) 

.]     Against  u-Jiom  ohtained. — The  rule  nisi  can  be  made  absolute 

against  those  only  who  are  parties  to  it,  and  who  have  had  an  opportunity 
to  shew  cause  against  it.  Thus,  where  a  rule  was  obtained,  calling  on 
churchwardens  and  overseers  to  show  cause  why  a  mandamus  should  not 
go,  directed  to  them  and  the  ticenty  principal  inhahitants,  (&c.,  it  was 
held  to  be  bad,  for  these  last  should  have  been  parties  to  the  rule;  but 
the  Court  gave  leave  to  amend,  saying  that  it  would  be  good  on  new 
service. (/) 

.]     Form  of  liiilc. — The  Court,  on  making  the  rule  absolute,  will, 

for  the  purposes  of  justice,  mould  the  rule  nisi  according  to  the  exigen- 
cies of  each  particular  case,  and  to  that  end  will  frame  the  rule  absolute 
accordingly.  Its  form  should  be  attentively  considered,  as  the  writ  must 
follow  the  rule,  and  the  Court  cannot  mould  the  writ  on  an  application 
for  a  peremptory  mandamus. (^)  Thus,  the  Court  will,  if  necessary, 
strike  out  part  of  the  rule  nisi,(/i)  and  make  the  rule  absolute  in  a  modi- 
fied form ;  as  to  hear  an  appeal  upon  certain  specific  grounds,  as  upon  the 
first,  second,  fifth,  and  sixth  grounds  of  appeal. (/')  So,  on  an  application 
to  compel  payment  of  500A  compensation,  assessed  by  a  jury,  and  of  ano- 
ther sum  for  costs,  the  Court  granted  the  rule  absolute  for  payment  of 
the  500?.  only.(.y) 

* .]     Hoio  ohtained. — As  to  obtaining  the  rule,  see  ante,  r^gQg-i 

p.  295 ;  the  practice  in  the  main  being  the  same  as  that  of  the 
rule  nisi. 

As  the  rule  absolute  for  a  mandamus  cannot  be  drawn  up,  unless  the 
affidavits  used  on  shewing  cause  against  it  are  filed,  so,  if  the  attorney  for 
the  defendant  decline  to  file  them,  or  to  allow  them  to  be  filed,  the  Court 
will,  on  motion,  grant  a  peremptory  rule,  that  the  defendant's  attorney 

((^)  7  A.  &  E.  215.t     S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  274.     S.  C.  W.  W.  &D.  525,  supra,  n.  (c). 

(e)  Ante,  p.  234,  n.  (;»)■    In  re  Bromley,  3  D.  &  R.  SlO.f 

(/)  R.  V.  Clerkenwell  (Churchwardens),  Bull.  N.  P.  200. 

As  to  a  writ  against  "  Inhabitants,"  see  post,  tit.  "  Writ"  (Direction,  Inhabitants), 
p.  317. 

{g)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  3  A.  &  E.  535,  542.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222.f  R.  v.  Wor- 
cester Canal,  1  M.  &  R.  534.  R.  v.  Leicester  (J.),  4  B.  &  C.  SOl.f  S.  C.  7  D.  & 
R.  370.t  R.  V.  Sandwich  (Mayor),  2  G.  &  D.  28,  35.  S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  895.t  R.  v. 
Nottingham  Old  Water  Works,  1  N.  &  P.  488.f  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  335.1  R.  v.  Wilts. 
(J.),  8  D.  719.  R.  V.  Barker,  Burr.  1269,  where  see  form  of  rule.  R.  v.  Carpenter, 
6  A.  &  E.  794,  SOl.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  775  ;f  and  see  R.  v.  Eye  (Mayor),  9  A.  &  E. 
675.1     S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  348.     S.  C.  8  L.  J.,  N.  S.  142,  Q.  B. 

(h)  R.  V.  Cumberland  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  193.  R.  v.  Nottingham  Old  Water  Works, 
6  A.  &  E.  355.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  480.t  R.  v.  Victoria  Park,  1  Q.  B.  290.t  S.  C.  4 
P.  &D.  639. 

(«■)  R.  V.  Suffolk  (J.),  1  B.  &  A.  640.t     See  ante,  p.  232,  n.  {h). 

\j)  R.  T.  Nottingham  Old  Waterworks,  6  A.  &  E.  355.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  480.  S. 
C.  W.  W.  &  D.  166  ;   1  Q.  B.  290,t  supra,  n.  (/*)• 

June,  1852.— 23 


354  tapping's    mandamus. 

shall  produce  the  affidavits  at  the  Crown  Office  on  a  short  day,  to  bo 
named  in  such  rule,  in  order  that  they  maybe  filed. (/t) 

.]      Cosfs. — Where  a  rule  for  a  mandamus  is  made  absolute,  the 

costs  of  the  application  must,  pursuant  to  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  G,  be 
made  the  subject  of  a  separate  application,  and  will  not  be  considered  by 
the  Court  on  disposing  of  the  rule ;  because,  when  the  writ  has  issued,  it 
may  be  the  return  may  shew  that  the  defendant  has  acted  justly. (/)  It 
is,  however,  a  general  rule,  that  if  the  application  for  the  rule,  when 
made  against  a  public  officer,  be  discharged,  the  Court  will,  if  such  appli- 
cation have  been  made  without  good  foundation,  inflict  costs  upon  the 
applicant ;  but  if  the  point  were  new  or  doubtful,  the  Court  will  not,  in 
its  discretion,  inflict  costs.  In  all  other  cases,  the  Court  will  also  exercise 
its  discretion  as  to  costs. (vn) 

.]     Amendment  of. — If  the  rule  be  not  such  as  the  prosecutor  is 

contented  with,  or  be  misconceived,  he  should  apply  to  the  Court  before 
he  issues  the  writ  for  leave  to  amend  it,(«)  and  the  Court  will,  if  neces- 
sary to  meet  the  justice  of  the  case,  so  amend  it.(o)  Although  the  Court 
has,  in  one  case,  refused  to  amend  an  informal  rule  after  the  writ  had 
issued,  but  left  it  to  be  cither  superseded  or  quashed, (jj)  yet  subsequent 
decisions  shew,  that  the  Court  will  now  amend  it  in  such  a  case ;  or,  on  a 
proper  application,  they  will  make  a  rule  for  the  amendment  of  the  rule 
upon  which  the  writ  has  issued,  notwithstanding  the  writ  may  have  been 
quashed  for  not  having  been  in  conformity  with  such  last  mentioned 
rule. (2) 

.]      Compelling  Prosecutor  to  'proceed  witli  Rule. — After  the  rule 

absolute  for  the  writ  has  been  obtained  by  the  prosecutor,  he  should  duly 
r*Rn~l  proceed  to  sue  out  his  writ ;  if,  however,  he  do  not  do  so,  the 
^  ^defendant  should  move,  under  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  6,  or  as 

to  Ireland,  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  for  a  rule  to  shew  cause  why  the  pro- 
secutor should  not  pay  the  costs  of  opposing  the  issuing  of  the  writ  of 
mandamus,  or  proceed  in  the "  prosecution  thereof.  This  rule,  when  ob- 
tained, is  brought  on  as  an  ordinary  rule,  and  the  Court  will,  after  having 
heard  it  discussed,  decide  between  the  parties ;  if  the  prosecutor  have  not 
been  guilty  of  laches,  it  will  discharge  the  rule,  but  if  he  have,  it  will 
either  make  it  absolute  unconditionally,  or  impose  terms  upon  the  prose- 
cutor, (r) 

(A)  R.  T.  Middlesex  (J.),  1  Chit.  368. 

U)  R.  V.  Kalop  (J.),  6  D.  28.  Ex  parte  Davies,  5  B.  &  Ad.  1091.f  See  post,  tit. 
"  Costs." 

(to)  Ante,  p.  40,  n.  (</),  and  see  post,  tit.  "Costs." 

\n)  R.  V.  Water  Eaton  (Manor),  2  Smith,  54.  R.  v.  Tucker,  5  D.  &  R.  434;t  S. 
C.  3  B.  &  C.  545.f  R.  V.  Clerlvenwell,  Bull.  N.  P.  200.  See  post,  tit.  "Writ," 
(Amendment). 

As  to  the  amendment  of  rules  in  general,  see  Chit.  Prac.  p.  1427. 

(0)  R.  V.  Bankes,  Burr.  1454.     S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  445. 

(p)  R.  V.  Wiseman,  1  Barn.  405,  406. 

(o)  R.  V.  East  Lancashire  Railway,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  127,  Q.  B.,  and  see  R.  v. 
Bankes,  Burr.  1452.     S.  C.  1  W.  Bl.  455  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  200. 

(r)  R.  V.  Dartmouth  (Mayor),  2  D.,  N.  S.  980.  S.  C.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  83,  M.  C. 
See  the  stats.  App. 


FORM,     ETC. 


355 


^CHAPTER  THE  FIFTH. 


[*308] 


THE   WRIT   OF    MANDAMUS,    ITS   FORM,    &C.,    TOGETHER   WITH   THE 
SUBSEQUENT    PROCEEDINGS  ANTERIOR  TO  THE   RETURN. 

Having  in  the  preceding  chapter  treated  of  the  application  to  the 
Court,  and  of  the  rule  absolute  for  the  writ  of  mandamus,  we  now  pro- 
ceed, agreeably  with  the  following  analysis,  to  treat  of  the  form  of  the 
writ,  the  manner  of  issuing  llie  same,  &c.,  and  of  such  other  proceed- 
ings to  the  return,  exclusive,  as  arc  neccs.sary  to  the  due  prosecution 
thereof. 


The  Writ. 

The  AVrit. 

By  whom  prepared 

- 

308 

Of  demand  and  refusal 

323 

Form  thereof 

- 

309 

Of  absence  of  specific  legal 

Inducement 

- 

309 

remedy 

-  323 

Averments 

- 

309 

Mandatory  clause    - 

-  323 

Substance  of  writ 

- 

310 

Teste  and  return  day 

328 

According  to  rule 

. 

310 

Indorsements 

-  330 

Direction 

_ 

310 

How  sued  out 

-  330 

Corporate  body 

- 

314 

How  served 

-  330 

Officers 

- 

317 

Filing  the  writ 

-  331 

College 

. 

317 

Cross  or  concurrent  writs 

331 

Inhabitants  of  pai'ish 

317 

What      - 

-  331 

Parish  officers 

. 

318 

Motion  for 

-  331 

Justices 

- 

318 

Rule  for 

-  332 

How  misdirection 

waived 

Return 

-  333 

or  taken  advan 

tage  of 

318 

Costs      -        -         - 

-  333 

Inducement 

. 

319 

Alias  and  pluries  writs 

333 

Averments 

_ 

319 

When  granted 

-  333 

Of  jurisdiction 

of  Court 

319 

Amendment  of  writ  - 

-  334 

Of  prosecutor^ 

title 

320 

Supersedas 

-  335 

Of  defendant's 

duty 

322 

Quashing 

-  336 

The  Writ.]  Bi/  u-hom  prepared. — The  writ  must  be  prepared  by  the 
attorney  of  the  prosecutor,  or  (if  in  person)  by  the  party  suing  out  the 
same. (a) 

As  the  success  of  the  prosecutor's  case  is  mainly  dependent  upon  the 
sufficiency  of  the  writ,  and  as   the  majority  of  such  writs  are  founded 
*upon  either  intricate  facts,  or  important  principles  of  law,  it  is  r^onqi 
advised  that  they  should  be  drawn  by  counsel,  and,  in  some  in- 
stances, settled  in  consultation. 

.]     Form  of  Writ. — The  writ  of  mandamus  is  in  its  form  no  more 

than  a  command  by  the  Queen  to  those  to  whom  it  is  directed  to  do  their 
duty,  &c.,  by  the  performance  of  a  particular  act  or  acts,  as  to  admit  to  an 
office,  freedom,  &c.,  in  favour  of  the  prosecutor  ;  his  legal  title  to  such  per- 

(a)  See  Cr.  Cff.  R.  r.  2,  App.  x\.s  to  issuing  the  writ,  see  infra,  "  How  sued  out." 


356  TAPriNG    S     MANDAMUS. 

formancc  by  those  from  wliom  it  is  rcquived,  being  stated  as  inducement 
to  the  command  or  mandatory  clause  of  the  writ.(Z*) 

The  writ  has,  in  form,  been  likened  to  a  declaration  in  a  personal 
action (r)  in  this,  that  no  precise  form  of  words  is  necessary,  provided  it 
be  sufficient  both  in  form  and  in  substance ;  ((7)  for  two  conditions  are 
required  for  the  perfection  of  the  writ,  the  one,  that  it  be  in  matter  suffi- 
cient, the  other,  that  it  be  deduced  and  expressed  according  to  the  forms 
of  law ;  so  that  an  absence  of  cither  of  such  conditions  will  vitiate  the 
writ.(^) 

.]     Form  of;  Inducement}  Averments,  dr.. — As  all  the  principles 

and  rules  of  pleading  in  civil  actions  are  also  applicable  to  a  writ  of  man- 
damus, &c.,(/)  so  the  inducement  and  averments  of  such  a  writ  are  sub- 
jected to  their  governance.  Thus,  matter  of  inducement  or  rccilal  may  be 
'  generally  alleged ;  also,  incidental  matter  should  not  be  specially  stated ;{(]) 
in  other  words,  they  do  not  require  so  much  certainty  as  the  main  aver- 
ments, or  the  mandatory  clause  of  the  writ,(/t)  which  should  be  expressed 
with  precision  and  certainty, (t)  or  the  writ  may  be  quashed. (J)  Also, 
as  facts,  not  evidence,  should  be  averred,  so  the  writ  must  not  be  argu- 
mentative.(A-) 

Should  the  writ  be  defective  for  either  of  these  causes,  the  Court  will,  in 
r*'^im  '^^^  discretion,  either  supersede  or  cjuash  it,  and  refuse  the  *peremp- 
tory  writ :  thus,  where  a  writ  to  amove  certain  fellows  of  a  college 
for  not  having  taken  the  necessary  oaths  to  the  state,  was  so  framed  that 
it  did  not  appear  but  that  the  fellows  therein  mentioned  might  have  taken 
the  oaths  required,  at  the  Quarter  Sessions,  a  peremptory  writ  was  de- 
nied.(/)  Also,  as  a  writ  which  appertains  to  an  office,  of  which  the  Judges 
are  not  judicially  cognizant,  should  specially  state  the  nature  of  such  office, 
in  order  that  it  may  appear  to  the  Court  that  it  is  one  properly  the  subject 
of  mandamus,(?H)  so,  if  such  office  be  not  specifically  described,  the  Court 
will  refuse  the  writ. 

[h)  See  ante,  p.  3,  n.  {h),  5,  n.  {j).  R.  v.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  536.  S.  C.  8  Mod. 
28.     S.  C.  1  P.  Wms.  348.     R.  v.  Kelk,  1  G.  &  D.  130.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  GGO.f 

(c)  R.  V.  Oxford  (Ep.),  7  East,  351.  A  return  has  also  been  likened  to  a  declara- 
tion, 3  B.  &  Ad.  2T8.t     S.  C.  2  N.  &  M.  12G.t     See  post,  tit.  "Return." 

[d)  n  East,  351,  supra.  R.  v.  Nottingham  (Mayor),  Saj-.  37,  per  Lee,  C.  J.  A 
mandamus,  having  the  year  expressed  by  figures,  is  not  thereby  vitiated.  Butler 
V.  Cobbett,  11  Mod.  255"!  R.  v.  Carpenter,  6  A.  &  E.  794.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  775,t 
and  see  6  A.  &  E.  794.t 

ie)  Colt  v.  Coventry  (Ep.),  Hob.  164.  ( f)  See  ante,  p.  8,  n.  (y). 

{g)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras  (Trustees),  3  A.  &  E.  540.t  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222,t  ^here 
see  form.     R.  v.  Win,  2  Keb.  738,  742 ;  Bull.  N.  P.  200,  and  cases  there  cited. 

ih)  Steph.  PI.  409,  5th  edit. 

(0  R.  V.  Bristol  Dock,  6  B.  &  C.  191.1  S.  C.  9  D.  &  R.  319,t  where  see  form  of 
averments,  &c.     See  infra,  "  Mandatory  Clause,"  and  post,  "Return"  (Form). 

( /)  See  post,  tit.  "  Quashing  Writ." 

(A-)  R.  V.  York,  5  T.  R.  73.  R.  v.  Hereford  (Mayor),  6  Mod.  309.  S.  C.  2  Salk 
701.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  560. 

(?)R.  V.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Mod.  241,  n.  [a).  S.  C.  Comb.  282.  See  tit.  "  Col- 
lege" (Fellows,  Admission). 

(m)  Anon.,  2  Mod.  316;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."     1  Lev.  162.     S.  C.  Raym.  152. 


FORM,     ETC.  357 

.]  Substance  of  ^Yl''d. — The  writ;  as  we  liaye  seen,  must  be  suffi- 
cient in  substance,  as  to  wbich  the  primary  rule  is,  that  "  it  must  he  framed 
in  strict  accordance  icitli  its  rxdc  ahsohite,"  or  it  will  be  superseded  if  not 
returned,  but  if  returned,  it  will  be  quashed(?i)  with  costs.  Thus,  where 
the  rule  was,  that  a  writ  of  mandamus  should  go  to  "  a  mayor  and  alder- 
men to  call  a  Hall,  and  do  the  business  of  the  corporation,"  and  the  man- 
damus was  drawn  up,  "  to  assemble  tlie  corporation,  and  admit  the  several 
persons  who  had  right  to  their  freedom,"  not  naming  them,  the  Court,  on 
motion,  superseded  the  writ  with  costs,  (o) 

The  writ  must  not  exceed  its  rule,  beyond  adding  merely  incidental  re- 
quirements, as  by  materially  enlarging  the  substantial  terms  thereof, 
otherwise  the  Court  will  quash  the  writ,  notwithstanding  they  might, 
on  application  upon  the  same  affidavits,  have  granted  a  writ  equally  exten- 
sive.(p) 

.]     Direction  of  Writ. — The  Direction  is  so  material  a  portion  of 

the  writ,  and,  when  defective,  gives  to  the  defendant  a  defence  so  clear  and 
simple,  that  too  much  care  cannot  be  bestowed  upon  it,  in  order  to  ensure 
its  accuracy. (g) 

B.  V.  Dartmouth  (Mayor),  3  Salk.  229,  2  ;  3  Bac.  Abr.  530.  See  tit.  "Ashburton" 
(Eight  Men  of),  and  post,  tits.  "  Supersedeas,"  "  Quashing  Writ." 

(n)  Ante,  p.  305.  R.  t.  Wildman,  Stra.  879.  S.  C.  1  Baru.  405,  406,  (although 
the  rule  be  not  drawn  up  as  moved).  R.  v.  Kingston-upon-Hull  (Mayor),  8  Mod. 
209.  R.  V.  Water  Eaton  (Manor),  2  Smith,  54  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (A.)  R.  v. 
St.  Prancras,  11  A.  &  E.  28.  R.  v.  East  Lancashire  Railway,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  127, 
Q.  B. 

(o)  R.  V.  Kingston-upon-Hull  (^Mayor),  11  Jlod.  382.  S.  C.  8  Mod.  209.  S.  C. 
Stra.  578  ;  Stra.  893.     See  post,  tits.  "  Quashing  Writ,"  "  Supersedeas." 

[p]  R.  V.  Water  Eaton  (Manor),  2  Smith,  54.  See  post,  tits.  "  Quashing  Writ," 
"  Supersedeas." 

(9)  See  post,  tits.  "  Supersedeas,"  "  Quashing  Writ,"  "  Returu." 

The  following  is  an  alphabetical  series  of  the  usual  directions  of  the  writ : 

Alderman.     To  A.  B.,  Esquire,  an  Alderman   of  our  City  of ,  one   of  the 

Keepers  of  the  Peace,  and  Justices  assigned,  &:c.,  Greeting. 

Assizes  (Nisi  Prius).     To  our  Justices  assigned  to  hold  the  Assizes,  Greeting. 

.  [Crown  Court).     To  our  Justices  of  Oyer  and  Terminer,  and  General  Gaol 

Delivery,  Greeting. 

Beridck-upon-Tweed.  To  the  Mayor  and  Bailiffs  of  our  Borough  of  BerAvick- 
npon-Tweed,  Greeting,  &c.,  or.  To  the  Mayor  and  Bailiffs  of  Berwick-upon- 
Tweed,  &c. 

Borough  Compter.  To  the  Gaoler  or  Keeper  of  our  Gaol,  called  "  The  Bo- 
rough Compter,"  in  and  for  our  Borough  of  Southwark,  or  his  Deputy  there, 
Greeting,  &c. 

Borough  Coiporatioi.     See  "  Coiporation  of  Borough." 

Borough  Goal.     To  the  Gaoler  or  Keeper  of  our  Gaol  or  Prison  at ,  in  and 

for  the  Borough  of ,  or  his  Deputy  there,  Greeting,  &c. 

Central  Criminal  Court.  To  our  Justices  of  the  Central  Criminal  Court,  and  to 
every  of  them.  Greeting,  &c. 

Cheshire.  To  the  Sheriff  of  our  County  of  Chester,  Greeting.  We  command 
you  that  you  do  not  forbear  by  reason  of  any  liberty  in  your  Bailiwick,  etc. 

Cinque  Forts.  To  our  Constable  of  our  Castle  of  Dover,  and  Lord  Warden 
of  the  Cinque  Ports,  or  his  Lieutenant  there.  Greeting ;  or  To  the  Constable  of 
Dover  Castle ;  or  To  the  Constable  of  the  Castle  of  Dover.  Frank  v.  James,  5 
D.  723. 

Commissari/  of  York.  To  the  Commissary  of  the  Province  of  York  (7  East, 
348  b.) 

Commissioners  [Poor  Law).     To  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners,  Greeting,  &c. 


358  T  A  r  P  I  N  G  '  S     MANDAMUS. 

r*qi1  TO  T       *Tlio  Court  when   it  grants  the  rule  for  the  writ  will  not 
'-  *"      usually  specify  *tho  person,  &c.,  to  whom  it  shall  be  directed; 

» 

Commissioners   (Tilhc).     To  the  Tithe  Commissioners  for  England   and  Wale 
Greeting,  &c. 

Coroner.     To  A.  B.,  Gentleman,  one  of  our  Coroners  of  and  for  our  County  of 

,  Greeting,  &c.,  or  when  to  the  whole,  To  the  Coroners  of  our  County  of , 

■ ,  or  of  our  City  of ,  Greeting,  &c. 

Corporation  of  a  Borough.  To  the  Mayor,  Aldermen,  and  Councillors  of  our 
Borough  of ,  in  our  County  of ,  Greeting,  &c. 

Count!/  Gaol.     To  the  Sheriff  of ,  and  to  the  Keeper  of  our  Gaol  at ,  of 

and  for  our  said  County,  or  his  Deputy  there,  Greeting,  &c. 

Dover  Gaol.  To  the  Mayor  and  Jurats  of  the  Town  and  Port  of  Dover,  and 
to  the  Water  Bailiff  and  Keeper  of  the  Gaol  of  the  said  Town  and  Port,  or  to  his 
Deputy  there,  Greeting,  &c. 

Durham.     To  the  Chancellor  of  our  County  Palatine  of  Durham,  Greeting. 

Elisors.     To  A.  B.,  and  C.  D.,  Elisors,  appointed  by  our  Court  of  ,  in  this 

behalf,  Greeting. 

Giltspur  Street  Compter.  To  the  Gaoler  or  Keeper  of  our  Gaol  or  Prison  in  Gilt- 
spur  Street,  in  our  City  of  London,  or  his  Deputy  there,  Greeting. 

House  of  Correction  {Middle^^cx).  To  the  Governor  of  the  House  of  Correction 
for  the  County  of  Middlesex,  in  Cold-bath  Fields,  or  his  Deputy  there,  Greet- 
ing, &c. 

Justices  of  Assize.  To  our  Justices  of  Oyer  and  Terminer,  iu  and  for  our  County 
of ,  and  to  every  of  them,  Greeting,  &c. 

Justices  of  the  Peace  {Generally).  To  the  Keepers  of  our  Peace,  and  our 
Justices   assigned  to  hear  and  determine  divers  Felonies,  Trespasses,  and  other 

Misdemeanors    committed  within  our  County  of   ,  and   to   every  of   them, 

Greeting. 

.     {Individually).     To  A.  B.,  and  C.  D.,  Esquires,  two  of  the  Keepers  of  our 

Peace,  and  our  justices  assigned,  &c.,  Greeting. 

Lancaster.  To  the  Chancellor  of  our  County  Palatine  of  Lancaster,  Greet- 
ing, &c. 

Lieutenant  of  the  Tower.  To  the  Lieutenant  of  the  Tower  of  London,  or  his 
Deputy  there,  Greeting. 

Lord  Mayor  of  London.  To  the  Bight  Honourable  J.  H.,  Mayor  of  our  City  of 
London,  one  of  the  Keepers  of  our  Peace  and  our  Justices  assigned  to  hear  and 
determine  divers  Felonies,  Trespasses,  and  other  Misdemeanors  committed  within 
our  City  of  London,  Greeting. 

Newgate.  To  the  Keeper  of  our  Gaol  of  Newgate,  or  his  Deputy  there, 
Greeting. 

New  Prison,  ClerkenweU.  To  the  Gaoler  or  Keeper  of  our  Gaol,  the  New 
Prison  at  ClerkenweU,  in  our  County  of  Middlesex,  or  his  Deputy  there,  Greeting. 

Penitentiary.  To  the  Governor  of  the  General  Penitentiary  at  Milbank,  in  our 
County  of  Middlesex,  or  his  Deputy  there,  Greeting. 

Pentonville  Prison.  To  the  Governor  of  our  Prison  called  "  The  Pentonville 
Prison,"  at  Pentonville,  in  our  County  of  Middlesex,  or  his  Deputy  there,  Greeting. 

Queen's  Prison.  To  the  Keeper  of  our  Prison  called  '•  The  Queen's  Prison,"  or 
his  Deputy  there.  Greeting. 

Recorder  of  a  Borough.     To  A.  B.,  Esquire,  Recorder  of  our  Borough  of  , 

in  our  County  of ,  our  Justice  assigned  to  hear  and  determine,  &c.,  in  our  said 

Borough,  Greeting. 

Sessions    [Borough).      To   the  Recorder  of  our  Borough   of  ,  our  Justice 

assigned  to  hear  and  determine,  &c.,  Greeting. 

Sessions  {County).  To  tiie  Keepers  of  our  Peace  and  our  Justices  assigned  to 
hear  and  determine  divers  Felonies,  Trespasses,  and  other  Misdemeanors  commit- 
ted within  our  County  of ,  Greeting. 

Sessions  [I'eltr).    To  such  of  the  Keepers  of  our  Peace  and  Justices  assigned, 

&c.,  as  may  be  in  attendance  at  a  Petty  Sessions  to  be  held  on  the day  of 

,  at ,  in  our  said  County,  Greeting. 

Sheriff  {Bristol).     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  City  of  Bristol,  Greeting,  &c. 

".'    {Canterbury).     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  City  of  Canterbury,  Greeting,  &c. 


FORM,     ETC.  359 

SO  that  a  defective  ^direction  is  at  the  peril  of  the  prosecutor.(r)  p;!:^  i  o-i 
But  where  an  account  of  the  intricate  interests  of  the  defendants, 
as  corporate  members,  or  for  any  other  cause,  there  is  great  difficulty  as 
to  how  the  writ  should  be  directed,  the  Court  will  state  to  whom  it  shall 
be  directed. (s)  So  in  cases  under  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  or  as  to  Ireland, 
9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  the  Court  will,  in  its  discretion,  state  to  whom  and 
how  the  writ  shall  be  directed.  (^) 

It  is  not  necessary  that  the  writ  should  be  directed  to  all  those  against 
whom  the  rule  nisi  is  obtained,  for  the  Court  will  mould  the  latter  when 

.    {Carmarthen.)     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  Town   and  County  of  Carmarthen, 

Greeting,  &c. 

.     [Chester).     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  City  of  Chester,  Greeting,  &c. 

.     (Eh/).     To  the  Sheriff  of  Cambridgeshire,  Greeting. 

.     [Exeter).    To  the  Sheriff  of  the  city  of  Exeter,  Greeting,  &c. 

.     [Gloucester).     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  City  of  Gloucester,  Greeting,  &c. 

.  [Ilaverfordicesi).  To  the  Sheriff  of  the  Town  and  County  of  Haverford- 
west, Greeting,  &c. 

.     {Kingston-upon-HiiU).     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  Town  and  County  of  Kings- 

ton-upon-HuU,  Greeting,  kc. 

.     [Lincoln).     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  City  of  Lincoln,  Greeting,  &c.     [Sec 

post,  p.  315,  n.  («)]. 

.     [Litchfield).     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  City  and  the  County  of  the  same  City, 

Greeting,  &c. 

.     {London).     As  in  London  there  are  two  Sheriffs,  so  the  writ  should  be 

directed.  To  the  Sheriffs  of  our  City  of  London,  Greeting. 

.     [Middlesex).     Although  two  individuals  act  as  Sheriff,  yet  in  law  they 

constitute  but  one  Sheriff,  and  the  writ  must  be  directed  accordingly,  To  the 
Sheriff  of  Middlesex,  Greeting. 

.  [Newcastle-upon-Tyne.)  To  the  Sheriff  of  the  Town  and  County  of  New- 
castle-upon-Tyne, Greeting. 

.     [Norwich).     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  City  of  Norwich,  Greeting,  &c. 

.     [Nottingham).     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  Town  and  County  of  Nottingham, 

Greeting,  &c. 

.     [Oxford).     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  County  of  Oxford,  Greeting,  &c. 

.  [Poole).  To  the  Sheriff  of  the  Town  and  County  of  Poole,  Greet- 
ing, &c. 

.     [Southwaric,  Borough).     To  the  Sheriff  of  Surrey,  &c..  Greeting. 

.  [Southampton).  To  the  Sheriff  of  the  Town  and  County  of  Southamp- 
ton, Greeting,  &c. 

.     [Worcester).     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  City  of  Worcester,  Greeting,  &c. 

.     [York).     To  the  Sheriff  of  the  City  of  York,  Greeting,  &c. 

Southwark  Borough  Court.  To  the  Mayor  of  our  City  of  London,  and  the  Re- 
corder of  the  said  City,  and  others  the  Keepers  of  our  Peace  and  our  Justices 
assigned  to  hear  and  determine  divers  Felonies,  Trespasses,  and  other  Misdemean- 
ors committed  within  our  Borough  of  Southwark,  Greeting,  &c. 

TolhlU-ficlds  Brideicell.  To  the  Governor  of  the  Tothill-fields Bridewell,  or  his 
Deputy  there.  Greeting. 

Tower  [Lieutenant  of).     See  tit.  ^^  LAeutenant  of  ToicerP 

Whitecross  Street  Prison.  To  the  Sheriff  of  London  and  Middlesex,  and  to  the 
Gaoler  or  Keeper  of  the  Debtors'  Prison  for  London  and  Middlesex  in  Whitecross 
Street,  or  his  Deputy  there,  Greeting. 

(r)  R.  V.  Wigan  (Corp.),  Burr.  782,  198  ;  Stra.  897.  R.  v.  Plymouth  (Borough), 
1  Bar.  81.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (C.)  But  see  13  East,  427.  R.  v.  Rochester 
(Dean,  &c.),  1  Barn.  40.     Anon.,  2  Barn.  361.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (F.) 

As  to  the  direction  of  writ  to  elect  and  to  swear  in,  see  8  Mod.  112,  128.  As  to 
cases  within  stats.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4  (E.),  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113  (L),  see  those 
stats.  App. 

(s)  R.  V.  London  Requests'  Court,  7  East,  295,  infra,  n.  (t). 

[t)  See  supra,  n.  [s),  and  stats.  App. 


360  tapping's    mandamus. 

making  it  absolute,  according  to  the  justice  of  the  casc.(H)  The  writ 
should,  however,  follow  the  rule  absolute  in  this  respect. (r) 

The  writ  must  be  directed  to  all  those  who  are  legally  bound  to  execute 
it,(7r)  and  to  them  only  j(.')  although  they  may  not  be  those 
L  oi'tj  *^^|jQc.g  -wrongful  act,  &c.,  as  removal  from  an  office,  &c.  has  occa- 
sioned the  writ.  A  breach  of  this  rule  renders  the  writ  liable  to  be  either 
superseded  or  quashed  ;(y)  thus  where  a  writ  directed  to  a  mayor,  &c., 
stated  that  A.  and  B.  had  removed  the  prosecutor  from  his  office  of 
burgess,  and  by  its  mandatory  clause  commanded  the  mayor,  &c.,  to 
command  A.  and  13.  to  restore  him ;  the  Court,  on  motion,  c^uashed  it, 
for  the  absurdity  of  it  being  directed  to  one  person,  to  command 
others.  (5;) 

Where  the  act,  the  performance  of  which  is  commanded  by  the  wi-it, 
1^  joint,  and  one  party  only  refuses,  and  the  other  or  others  are  willing; 
nevertheless  the  tvrit  must  be  directed  against  both  or  all.(o)  Thus 
where  one  parish  officer  applies  for  a  mandamus  against  his  fellow  officer, 
to  concur  in  making  a  rate,  &c.,  the  writ  must,  according  to  the  acknow- 
ledged and  accustomed  practice,  be  against  and  directed  to,  both;  i.  e.  as 
well  against  the  applicant,  as  the  defaulting  officer. (i)  So  where  two  only 
have  a  concurrent  jurisdiction,  the  writ  should,  it  seems,  be  directed  to 
both,  commanding  them,  or  one  of  them,(c)  &c. 

.      Corporate  Body. — The  writ,  when  directed  to  a  corporate  body, 

should  accurately  state  the  name  of  incorporation,  and  therein  pursue  th  3 
act  of  Parliament,  charter,  or  other  instrument  of  incorporation,  for  no 
words  of  equivalent  import  can  be  substituted.  ((/)     As,  however,  a  body 

(?/)  See  ante,  p.  305,  and  see  post.  Bull.  N.  P.  200 ;  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  191. 

(v)  See  ante,  p.  310,  n.  («),  (0),  {p). 

[iv)  Ante,  p.  50,  n.  (?('),  158,  n.  {k),  (l).  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (F.)  E.  v. 
Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  699.  S.  C.  Garth.  501.  R.  v.  Gloucester  (Mayor), 
Holt,  451,  per  Powell,  J.  S.  G.  1  Roll.  409.  S.  G.  1  Bulst.  189.  Pees  v.  Leeds 
(Mayor),  Stra.  640.  R.  v.  Gambridge  (V.  G.),  Burr.  1654.  R.  v.  Norwich  (Mayor), 
Stra.  55.  R.  r.  Hereford  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  701,  6  ;  Gom.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (C.)  Prin's 
case,  1  Keb.  686.  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  67,  68,  164.  Estwick  v.  London  (Gity), 
Styles,  43.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  6  A.  &  B.  351. f  S.  G.  1  N.  &  P.  474.1  R.  v. 
Holt,  3  Keb.  668,  706,  734.  R.  v.  Plymouth  (Borough),  1  Barn.- 81.  R.  v.  Wigan 
(Mayor),  Burr.  1643.  Ex  parte  Girkett,  3  D.  327.  R.  v.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  Q.  B. 
621.t  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  730.  R.  v.  Smith,  2  M.  &  S.  594.  R.  v.  St.  Pancras 
(Churchwardens),  6  Jur.  391;  Ld.  Raym.  1244. 

(x)  Ante,  p.  212,  n.  (d).  R.  v.  Hereford  (Mayor),  Salk.  701.  R.  v.  Smith,  2  M. 
&  S.  594 ;  but  see  R.  v.  Holford,  2  Barn.  330,  350.  Anon.,  1  Barn.  402.  See  ante, 
p.  29. 

[y]  R.  V.  Gloucester,  3  Bulst.  190.  Dr.  "Witherington's  case,  1  Keb.  61.  R.  v. 
Croydon  Parish,  5  T.  R.  713.  Estwick  v.  London  (City),  Sty.  43,  1.  R.  v.  Sharpe, 
Gilb.  255 ;  1  W.  Blac.  52.  S.  G.  1  Wils.  266.  But  see  R.  v.  Colchester  (Town),  2 
Keb.  188.  R.  v.  Norwich  (Mayor),  Stra.  55.  See  post,  tits.  "Supersedeas," 
"  Quashing  Writ." 

(z)  See'ante,  p.  16,  n.  (/r).  R.  v.  Derby  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  436.  See  post,  tits. 
"  Supersedeas,"  "  Quashing  Writ." 

(a)  See  ante,  p.  220,  n.  (e),  221,  n.  (q).     R.  t.  Pickles.  3  Q.  B.  600.f 

(b)  Anon.,  2  Chit.  254.f     See  tit.  "Poor  (Rate  Making). 

(c)  See  ante.  p.  145,  146,  n.  (b).     R.  r.  London  (Ep.).  13  East,  427. 

(rf)  R.  Y.  Smith,  2  M.  &  S.  594,  598.     Estwick  v.  London  (City),  Sty.  43,  32.    See 


FORM,     ETC.  3G1 

corpoi'ate,  by  prescription,  may  have  several  names  by  reputation,  so  it 
follows,  that  if  it  be  called  by  one  of  such  names,  though  not  exactly  the 
right  or  visual  one,  the  writ  will  be  sufficient,  if  it  describe  the  official  con- 
ditions of  those  forming  the  body  corporate,  and  they  must  answer  the 
writ.(e)  But  if  the  corporate  body,  whatever  its  title  may  be,  be  mis- 
named, the  writ  will  be  quashed,  because  as  such  writ  cannot  have  any 
effect,  so  no  legal  object  can  be  obtained  by  its  prosecution. (/)  Thus,  if„ 
the  corporate  body  be  "  mayor,  alderman,  and  ^commonalty,"  a 
a  writ  to  the  mayor,  hnr (jesses,  and  commonalty,  is  bad.((7)  So  L  -^ 
where  a  writ  was  directed  to  the  hallivis,  &c.,  Gippi,  and  not  Gipidci,  it 
was  held  to  be  bad. (A)  So  because  a  writ  was  directed  '^To  the  Mayor  of 
the  City  of  Lincoln,  in  the  County  of  Lincoln,"  and  not  "in  the  County 
of  the  City  of  Lincoln,"  it  was  quashed,  there  being  no  such  person  to 
whom  a  peremptory  mandamus  could  go.('/)  So  if  the  right  of  election 
be  in  the  mayor  and  aldermen,  and  the  mandamus  be  directed  to  the 
mayor,  aldermen,  and  common  council,  the  Court  will  grant  a  supersedeas 
giiid  improvicU  emanavit.(^j")  But  if  the  duty  be  in  the  mayor,  alder- 
men, et  aV  de  commiini  concilio,  and  the  writ  be  directed  to  the  mayor, 
aldermen,  and  common  coxincil,  it  will  be  well  though  the  word  aV  be 
omitted. (A;) 

The  rule  that  a  writ  when  directed  to  a  corporate  body  should  describe 
it  by  its  corporate  title  prevails,  notwithstanding  a  vacancy  or  vacancies 
may  exist  in  one  or  more  of  its  offices,  as  those  of  mayor,  aldermen,  &c., 
for  its  name  of  incorporation  is  its  legal  description,  so  long  as  it  continues 
to  have  any  corporate  existence. (?)  Thus  if  there  be  no  mayor,  or  one  de 
facto,  and  not  de  jure,  and  although  the  writ  be  to  command  the  corpora- 
tion to  proceed  to  the  election  of  a  mayor,  yet  it  must  be  directed  to  "  the 
m,ayor"  &c.(m) 

form  in  Carpenter's  case,  Raym.  439.  Anon.,  12  Mod.  232.  Dr.  "Witherington's 
case,  1  Keb.  61.     R.  v.  Gloucester  (Mayor),  Holt,  451,  per  Powell,  J. 

(e)  Whitacre's  case,  11  Mod.  GT.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1233,  1283.  S.  C.  Holt,  443. 
S.  C.  2  Salk.  434.     Finch's  case,  6  Rep.  65,  66 ;  2  Roll.  Abr.  136. 

(/)  Sir  T.  Jon.  52.  Case  of  Abingdon  Town,  Carth.  501.  S.  C.  Salk.  700.  R. 
v.  Rippon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  433.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  563.  R.  v.  Ipswich  (Bailiffs),  2 
Salk.  434.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1233.  S.  C.  Holt,  443,  444,  445  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man." 
(C.) ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (B.),  (J.) 

(ff)  2  Salk.  433,  supra,  n.  (/) ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (C.) ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"Man."  (F.) 

(A)  2  Salk.  434,  435.  S.  0.  Ld.  Raym.  1233.  S.  C.  Holt,  443,  444,  445,  supra, 
n.  (/);  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (C.) ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (B.)  See  infra,  tits. 
"  Quashing  "Writ,"  "  Supersedeas." 

(/)  See  post,  p.  314,  n.  (/).  R.  v.  Lincoln  (Mayor)  12  Mod.  lao.  S.  C.  Carth. 
448.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  203,  and  cases  there  cited.  See  infra,  tit.  "Quashing 
Writ." 

(J)  R.V.Norwich  (Mayor),  Str.  55,  Holt,  cont. ;  Salk.  TOl,  3;  Salk.  231,8; 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (C);  but  see  R.  v.  Gloucester  (Blayor),  Holt,  451  ;  Stra. 
640,  n.  (1),  3rd  edit.     See  infra,  tit.  "  Supersedeas." 

(Jc)  Pees  V.  Leeds  (Mayor),  Stra.  640;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (C.) ;  Bac.  Abr. 
tit.  "  Man."  (F.) 

(?)  See  ante,  p.  167,  n.  (i).  R.  v.  Smith,  2  M.  &  S.  598;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man." 
(B.) 

[m)  R.  T.  Pembroke  (Corp.),  8  D.  304.     R.  v.  Bridgewater  (Corp.),  3  Doug.  379.f 


362  tapping's    m  a  n  d  a  im  u  s. 

If  the  (^luty,  as  to  elect,  &c.,  commanded  by  tlic  writ,  be  that  of  imrt 
only  of  a  corporate  body,  the  writ  may,  in  such  case,  be  directed  either  to 
such  part  only,  by  its  portion  of  the  corporate  name,  or  to  the  whole  cor- 
porate  body.(w)  Thus  where  to  a  mandamus  to  choose  a  *mayor, 
L  -*  directed  to  Jacoho  Courteen,  majori,  hallivh,  et  omnibus  princi- 
palihus  hurgensihus  hurgl  de  Ahingdon,  who,  by  their  constitution,  were 
to  choose  a  mayor  out  of  such  persons  as  should  be  proposed  by  the  com- 
monalty; it  was  objected,  that  the  writ  was  misdirected,  because  the 
name  of  incorporation  was  '■'■mayor,  haili.jfs,  mid  hurg esses ;"  but  the 
Court,  when  overruling  the  objection,  said,  *'  that  though  the  writ  might 
have  been  directed  to  the  whole  corporation,  yet  it  could  not  be  necessary, 
that  it  should  be  directed  to  more  than  those,  or  that  part  of  the  corporate 
body  which  was  concerned  in  the  execution  of  the  thing  required,  for  it  is 
not  in  the  power  of  others  to  put  the  command  of  the  writ  in  execu- 
tion."(o)  It  is  not,  therefore,  necessary  that  a  writ  to  a  corporate  body 
should,  in  every  case,  be  directed  to  the  wdiole  corporation  (though  it  may 
be  so),  for,  as  just  stated,  it  is  sufficient  if  it  be  directed  to  him  or  them 
who  alone  have  the  power  to  execute  the  writ.Q>)  If,  however,  the  writ 
be  to  be  executed  by  a  part  only  of  the  corporate  body,  and  the  direction 
be  not  to  such  body  by  its  corporate  name,  but  in  terms  extends  the 
description  beyond  the  part  legally  liable  to  execute  the  writ,  the  Court, 
on  motion,  will  either  supersede  or  quash  it.(q)  Thus,  where  a  writ  com- 
manded "  aldenne/i  and  emnmonalfy"  to  elect,  &c.,  which  direction  was 
not  a  command  to  the  body  by  its  corporate  name,  because,  by  the  char- 
ter upon  which  it  was  founded,  some  of  the  commonalty  were  excepted  j 
it  was  held,  that  as  the  command  extended  beyond  the  persons  who 
were  entitled  under  the  charter  to  concur  in  the  election,  such  a  direc- 
tion was  bad,  and  avoided  the  writ.(/-)  But  a  writ  directed  to  ''The 
Mayor  and  Burgesses,''  which  commanded  them  to  elect  and  swear  in   a 

R.  V.  Bedford  (Corp.),  1  East,  T9,  and  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  Burr.  2011.  Tayler 
V.  Gloucester  (City),  1  Roll.  409.  S.  C.  1  Bulst.  189.  S.  C.  2  Show.  204.  S.  C. 
3  Salk.  230,  8.     R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  1  N.  &  P.  4V4.f     S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  349.f 

(n)  Patrick's  case,  2  Keb.  67  ;  3  Keb.  706.  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk. 
699.  S.  C.  Carth.  501,  overruling  Holt's  case,  Jones,  52.  R.  v.  Gloucester  (Mayor), 
Holt,  450,  451,  per  Powell,  J.;  1  Roll.  409.  Pees  v.  Leeds  (Mayor),  Stra.  640. 
R.  V.  Cambridge  (V.  C),  Burr.  1654.  R.  v.  Norwich  (Mayor),  Stra.  55.  R.  v. 
Hereford  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  VOl,  6.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  560.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man." 
(C.)  Holt's  case,  Freem.  441.  See  Carth.  501 ;  Dyer,  333.  Estwick's  case,  2  Roll. 
Abr.  456.  R.  v.  Tregony  (Mayor),  8  Mod.  112.  S.  C.  8  Mod.  128.  R.  v.  Smith,  2 
M.  &  S.  598.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (F.) 

(o)  2  Salk.  G99,  supra,  n.  (n). 

[p)  Ante,  p.  315,  n.  («),  317.  R.  v.  Gloucester  (Mayor),  Holt,  450.  Harcourt  v. 
Fox,  Comb.  213.  R.  v.  Norwich  (Mayor),  Stra.  55.  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  Ld. 
Raym.  560.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  701,  6.  R.  y.  Smith,  2  M.  &  S.  591.  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"Man."  (F.) 

{q)  R.  V.  Smith,  2  M.  &  S.  583,  598.  R.  v.  Abingdon,  2  Salk.  701.  S.  C.  Ld. 
Raym.  560.  R.  v.  Taylor,  3  Salk.  231,  8.  R.  v.  Norwich  (Mayor),  Stra.  55.  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (B.),  (F.) 

{r)  2  M.  &  S.  597,  per  EUenborough,  C.  J.,  supra.  See  Case  of  Abingdon  Town, 
Carth.  501,  overruling  Holt's  case,  Jones,  52.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (F.)  See 
infra,  "  Mandatory  Clause." 


FORM,     ETC. 


363 


mayor,  "secundum  authorltatem  vestraiii,"  lias  been  bold  to  be  good; 
althougb  tbe  power  was  to  tbe  burgesses  to  elect,  and  to  the  mayor  to 
swear  in,  for  in  such  a  case,  tbe  direction  must  be  construed,  reddendo 
singula  singidis.(s) 

*Tbe  result  of  tbe  above  cases,  tberefore,  is,  tbat  if  tbe  writ  be 
directed  neitber  to  tbe  corporation,  by  its  corporate  name,  nor  to  •- 
tbosc  wbo   sbould  execute  it,  by  tbeir  proper  descriptions,  it  is  clearly 
bad,(/)  and  liable  eitber  to  be  superseded  or  quasbed. 

Tbe  writ  must  not  only  be  directed  to  tbe  corporation  or  select  body  in 
its  proper  name,  but  also  in  its  official  capacity,  as  expressed  in  tbe  rule 
absolute.(»)  Tbus,  in  a  case  wbere  tbe  writ  was  directed  to  tbe  two 
bailiffs  of  a  town  to  swear  in  otber  bailiffs,  and  tbey  objected  "  tbat  bay- 
ing sworn  in  otbers,  and  being  now  no  longer  bailiffs,  and  tbe  writ  not 
being  directed  to  tbem  in  tbeir  natural  capacities,  tbey  were  not  obliged 
to  pay  any  obedience  tbereto ;"  tbe  Court  bowever,  notwitbstanding, 
obliged  tbem  to  return  the  writ,  upon  tbe  assumption,  tbat  if  tbe  persons 
sworn  in  by  tbem  bad  no  rigbt  to  be  cbosen,  tbey,  tbe  defendants,  still 
continued  bailiffs,  and  ougbt  to  obey  tbe  writ.(i;) 

.]     .      Officers. — Tbe  writ,  wben  directed  to  an  individual, 

sbould  be  addressed  to  bim  by  bis  official  name,  if  tbe  writ  bave  relation 
to  bis  office,  as  such  a  course  obviates  any  inconvenience  tbat  may  arise 
from  the  personal  change  of  such  office. (?{?) 

.]     .      CoUege. — In  a  writ  to  a  college,  tbe  fellows  ougbt  to 

be  parties. (.t)  But  a  mandamus  directed  to  tbe  senior  fellow,  wbo  alone 
had  power  to  admit,  has  been  held  to  be  good,  without  the  name  of  the 
college.  (?/) 

.]     .     Tnlmhitanfs  of  Parish. — A  writ  of  mandamus  may 

properly  be  directed  to  the  "  Inhahitants"  of  a  parish,  althougb  not  in- 
corporated as  sucb,(z)  and  those  of  them  upon  whom  the  writ  shall  be 
served  may  be  punished  for  disobedience  if  they  neglect  it;  for  if  the 
Court  think  tbat  the  writ  ougbt  to  issue,  it  will  find  some  means  whereby 

(s)  R.  T.  Tregony  (Mayor),  8  Mod.  111.  S.  C.  8  Mod.  127.  And  see  1  Roll.  Abr. 
409  ;  2  Jones,  52,  &c.;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (C.) 

[t]  1  M.  &  S.  594,  supra,  n.  {q). 

{u)  See  ante,  p.  313,  n.  {v).  Papillon's  case.  Skin.  64.  R.  v.  WestLooc,  3  B.  & 
C.  685.t     S.  C.  5  D.  &R.  592.t     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (F.) 

(ii)  Clitheroe's  case,  G  Mod.  133.  R.  v.  Wrexham  (Churchwardens),  15  Yin.  Abr. 
215,  pi.  6.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (P.)  See  infra,  n.  («•). 

(«')  R.  V.  Cambridge  (U.),  1  W.  Blac.  551.  S.  C.  Burr.  1647.  R.  v.  Cambridge 
(Mayor),  Burr.  2011,  in  which  case  the  writ  was  directed  "to  the  late  mayor," 
without  specifying  his  name.  R.  v.  Dr.  "Ward,  7  East,  346,  n.  (6).  R.  t.  Ouze 
Bank  Commissioners,  3  A.  &  E.  544. f  See  form  in  Carpenter's  case,  Raym.  439, 
and  in  Taverner's  case,  Raym.  446. 

(.r)  R.  V.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Skin.  549.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  233,  368.  See  tit.  "  Univer- 
sity."    As  to  whom  notice  of  rule  should  be  given,  see  ante,  p.  286,  n.  (,r). 

(?/)  Patrick's  case,  2  Keb.  67  ;  3  Keb.  706    See  ante,  p.  316,  n.  (o). 

(z)  R.  V.  Wix  (Inhabs.)  2  B.  &  Ad.  197,  198,  199.t  R.  v.  S.  Saviour's  Parish,  7 
A.  &  E.  938.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  496.f  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  126,  where  see  a  form  of 
return  bv  inhabitants.  Ex  parte  Le  Cren,  2  D.  &  L.  571.  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  34, 
Q.  B.     See  ante,  tit.  "Parish." 


364  tapping's    mandamus. 

"'to  enforce  tLc  execution  tlicrcof.((/)  Thus,  ta  mandamus  has 
L  -'  been  granted  to  "  The  Churchwardens  and  Overseers  of  (he  Poor 
of  the  Parish  of  St.  James,'  ClerhcniceU,  and  to  the  princljial  inhaliiants 
thereof,"  to,  &c.(/>)  So  in  E.  T.,  1  Geo.  3,  a  mandamus  was  granted  to 
"  The  Vicar,  Churchwardens,  and  Parishioners  of  Croi/don,"  to,  &c.(c) 
But  in  a  subsequent  case  it  has  been  held,  that  where  a  duty  is  pcrform- 
ablo  by  the  inhabitants  of  a  parish,  a  mandamus  to  enforce  the  perform- 
ance thereof  is  properly  directed  to  "  Tltc  Churchwardens."  Thus,  if 
the  right  to  elect  a  sexton  be  in  tlie  inhabitants  of  a  parish,  and  a  man- 
damus to  hold  a  meeting  for  such  election  to  be  granted,  the  writ  may  be 
properly  directed  to  the  churchwardens,  and  not  to  the  inhabitants  gene- 
rally.(fO 

' .]  .  Parish  Officers. — If  one  parish  officer  as  a  churchwar- 
den, should  apply  for  a  mandamus  against  his  fellow  officers  to  concur  in 
an  act,  as  the  making  a  rate,  &c.,  the  writ  must  include  the  whole  of  the 
parish  officers,  as  well  the  applicant,(e)  as  the  defaulting  officers,  and  con- 
sequently be  directed  to  them. 

.]    .    Justices. — The  writ  when  against  justices  of  the  peace, 

should  be  directed  to  all  of  them  who,  having  jurisdiction,  have  refused 
to  exercise  it.(/) 

.]  How  misdirection  waived  or  tahen  advantage  of. — A  misdi- 
rection may  be  waived  by  the  defendant,  on  his  making  a  return  answer- 
ing the  exigency  of  the  writ,  either  in  the  wrong  name  of  the  writ,  or  by 
his  right  name,(y)  notwithstanding  the  return  may  be  insufficient. (/<) 

If  it  be  wished  to  take  advantage  of  a  misdirection,  tbe  defendant 
should  deny  the  supposal  of  the  writ,  and  return  "?io  s^Lch  officer,"  ''no 
such  corporation,"  &c.,  and  thereupon  the  writ,  if  it  be  defective,  will  be 
either  superceded  or  quashed,  because  it  cannot  be  executed. (i)  It  is  for 
r*QiQi  *^^^^  cause,  that  the  writ  need  not  aver  that  those  to  whom  it  is 
'-  ^  directed,  are  those  whose  duty  it  is  to  execute  the  wnt;(y)  for,  as 
before  stated,  if  it  be  not  directed  to  the  proper  person,  that  ftxct  may  and 

{a)  2  B.  &  Ad.  203,1  supra,  n.  (2) 

\b)  2  B.  &  Ad.  199,f  n.  (c),  supra,  n.  (z).     And  ante,  p.  305,  n.  {f). 

(c)  2  B.  &  Ad.  199,f  n.  (c),  supra,  n.  (2).     And  ante,  p.  305,  n.  (/). 

(d)  R.  V.  Stoke  Damerel,  5  A.  &  E.  588.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  5G.f  See  a  direction  to 
a  parish  governed  by  a  local  act,  H  A.  k  E.  2'7,f  n.  See  ante,  tits.  "  rarish," 
"Sexton,"  "Vestry." 

(e)  Ante,  p.  314,  n.  {h).  See  tit.  '-Poor'  (Rate).  Anon.,  2  Chit.  254.  See  tit. 
"  Poor"  (Rate). 

(/)  See  p.  234,  n.  (9),  242,  n.  [a).  Carly  v.  Hardy,  6  Mod.  139,  164.  S.  C.  Holt, 
407  ;  but  see  R.  v.  Ellis,  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  20  M.  C.  See  tit.  "Quarter  Sessions'  (Ap- 
peal, Application),  Petty  Sessions,  Warrant,  Application). 

{g)  Holt  446,  per  Keeling,  J.,  in  R.  v.  Mills,  1  Keb.  623. 

[li)  R.  V.  Smith,  2  M.  k  S.  594.  R.  v.  Tregony  (Mayor),  8  Mod.  129.  R.  v.  York 
(Mayor),  5  T.  R.  V4. 

[i]  Ante,  p.  310,  n.  {q).  Dr.  Witherington's  case,  1  Keb.  68,  and  cases  there 
cited.  Anon.,  Godb.  44,  pi.  52  ;  and  see  R.  v.  Maiden  ;  R.  v.  Ipswich  (Bailifls),  2 
Salk.  434.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1233;  Bull.  N.  P.  201  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (I.) 
infra,  p.  319,  n.  { jA-     See  post,  tits.  "  Supersedeas,"  "  Quashing  Writ." 

(/)  R.  V.  Ward,  Stra.  893. 


FORM,     E  T  C.  365 

should  bo  rotiirnecl.(7.-)  The  prosecutor  is,  however  estopped  from  deny- 
ing that  the  defendants  arc  a  corporation,  officers,  See.,  if  he  have  so  de- 
scribed them  by  the  direction  of  his  ■writ.(?) 

If  the  writ  be  so  misdirected  that  it  cannot  be  amended,  the  Court  will, 
on  motion,  before  filing,  supersede  it  quia,  improvide  emanavit;  but  after 
return,  the  motion  must  be  to  quash  it,(??i)for  their  cannot  be  restitution 
on  a  mandamus  ill  directed. (?i)  The  Court  will,  in  its  discretion,  upon 
application,  grant  a  new  writ.(o)  The  defendant,  as  before  stated,  may 
by  his  return  traverse  the  supposal  of  the  writ,  and  so  raise  the  question 
of  misdirection  or  not.(p) 

.]     Inducement ;  Avermoits,  &c. — Although  matter  of  recital  or 

inducement  should  not  be  generally  alleged,  yet  it  must  be  in  substance 
sufficient  to  warrant  the  mandatory  clause  of  the  writ,  otherwise  the  writ 
will  not  shew  upon  its  face  the  right  of  the  prosecutor  to  that  which  he 
seeks,  which  is  a  defect  for  which  the  Ceurt  will  either  supersede  or  quash 

it-Oi)  ....  .  > 
.]     Averment  of  the  Jurisdiction  of  the   Court. — The  writ  must 

also  contain  a  statement  of  all  facts,  necessary  to  shew  the  Court  of  B.  R. 
that  it  has  jurisdiction  over  the  subject  of  the  writ,  and  in  order  to  afford 
the  defendant  an  opportunity  of  traversing  such  averment. (r)  Thus, 
where  a  mandamus  was  applied  for  "■  to  swear  in  one  who  had  been  elected 
to  be  one  of  the  Eight  Men  of  Ashburton  Court,"  the  Court  of  B.  R.  re- 
fused the  writ ;  because,  as  it  was  not  expressly  stated  what  the  office  was, 
nor  what  was  the  place  of  the  eight  men,  so  the  writ  did  *not  r^.ooc\~[ 
shew  to  the  Court  that  the  place  was  such  for  which  a  mandamus  / 

was  the  proper  remedy. (.s) 

(  If  on  the  face  of  the  writ  it  be  not  shown  that  the  Court  has  jurisdic-  ^ 
tion,  or  if  it  disclose  matter  which  shews  that  the  prosecutor  is  not  entitled 
to  it,  the  Court  will  either  supersede  or  quash  it,  and  it  has  been  held, 
that  such  defect  cannot  be  supplied  by  matter  appearing  in  the  return  jy 
for  unless  the  writ  be  supported,  the  return  cannot  come  before  the  Court. 

[k)  Ante,  p.  318,  n.  (/)  ;  Trem.  Eiit.  45,  452,  461,  4G5,  483.  E.  v.  Ward,  Str. 
892,  897.  S.  C.  Fitzg-.  123,  194.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  252,  294,  381.  R.  r.  Clapham,  1 
Yen.  110;  and  see  7  East,  346  (c) ;  Com.  Dig  tit.  "Man."  (C.) 

{I)  R.  V.  Halse,  1  Keb.  20.  R.  v.  Slythe.  9  D.  &;  R.  229.f  See  post,  tits.  "Return," 
"Pleas." 

(m)  R.  V.  Norwich  (Mayor),  Stra.  55,  180.  S.  C.  Salk.  699,  701,  433.  R.  v. 
Plymouth  (Borough),  1  Barn.  81.  R.  v.  Tregony  (Mayor),  8  Mod.  111.  Dr.  With- 
erington's  case,  1  Keb.  11.     See  post,  tits.  "  Supersedeas,"  "  Motion  to  Quash." 

(m)  Holt's  case,  Jones,  52.     See  ante,  p.  314,  n.  (/),  318,  n.  {i). 

[o)  Harcourt  v.  Fox,  Comb.  213. 

[p)  Ante,  p.  318,  n.  (i),  {Ic) ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (F.)  R.  v.  Ward,  Stra.  893. 
See  Holt,  446.     See  supra. 

(<7)  Ante,  p.  309,  n.  {g).  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  6  A.  &  E.  314.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  507.f 
See  post,  tits.  "Mandatory  Clause,"  "  Supersedeas,"  "  Quashing  Writ." 

(;•)  Ante,  p.  10,  11,  n.  (i),  30,  n.  (/),  78,  n.  (v),  113,  n.  {(/).  R.  v.  Gadsby,  1  N. 
&  P.  573,1  citing  R.  v.  Oxford  (E.),  7  East,  345.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  7  T.  R. 
467.  R.  V.  Margate  Pier,  3  B.  &  Ad.  220.f  See  tits.  "  Ashburton"  (Eight  Men  of), 
"  Curate,"  "Guildford"  (Approved  Men  of),  "  Office"  (Known  to  the  Law),  "  Tiver- 
ton" (Twenty-four  Men  of). 

(5)  Ante,  p.  43,  n.  («),  75,  n.  (c),  174,  n.  (/),  (^),  186,  n.  {I). 


366  tapping's    mandamus. 

Thus,  where  a  writ  of  mandamus  commanded  the  delivery  up  of  all  papers 
relating  to  the  office  of  clerk  of  the  Court  of  Requests,  but  did  not  shew 
any  claim  by  the  defendant  to  detain  them  by  virtue  of  any  right,  it  was 
held  that  the  writ  was  bad,  as  it  did  not  shew  that  the  detainer  was  by 
other  than  a  jirivatc  individual,  and  that  the  defect  could  not  be  supplied 
by  a  return,  which  disclosed  that  the  defendant  claimed  to  detain  them  as 
clerk  of  the  same  office.  (^) 

The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  not,  in  order  to  supply  a  remedy,  exercise  a 
jurisdiction  which  does  not  belong  to  them  ;(ii)  and,  therefore,  will,  at  any 
time  before  the  peremptory  mandamus  shall  issue,  suffer  itself  to  be  in- 
formed, and  examine  whether  the  writ  be  so  framed  as  to  give  them  juris- 
diction.(f) 

.]     Ai-rrnwnl  of  Prosecutor^ s    Title. — The  writ   should    contain 

allegations  of  all  such  facts,  as  are  necessary  to  shew  that  the  prosecutor 
is  legally  entitled  to  the  relief  he  prays,  otherwise  it  is  liable  to  be 
quashed. (?«)  Thus,  where  a  mandamus  to  command  an  ordinary  to 
license  a  curate,  merel}'  stated  that  he  had  been  duly  nominated  and 
(q^pointed  by  the  inhabitants  of  a  township,  to  be  curate  of  the  church  of 
P.,  without  stating  the  consent  of  the  rector,  or  cither  the  existence  of 
any  endowment,  or  of  a  custom  for  the  inhabitants  to  make  such  nomi- 
nation and  appointment,  the  Court  quashed  the  writ  for  insufficiency.  (:>") 
P^qoi-|  *The  rules  as  to  the  averments  of  title  are  as  follows.  That 
where  the  facts  stated  in  the  writ  are  sufficient,  if  not  denied,  to 
entitle  the  prosecutor  to  have  what  he  claims,  it  is  no  objection  that  they 
are  stated  generally;  thus,  in  the  case  of  a  mandamus  to  swear  in  one 
elected  a  freeman  of  a  corporation,  an  averment  that  the  prosecutor  is 
duly  elected,  and  ought  to  be  sworn  in,  is  sufficient,  though  so  generally 
stated ;  because,  if  these  facts  be  true,  he  ought  to  be  sworn  in.  But  where 
it  may  be  answered  that,  admitting  all  the  facts  stated  to  be  true,  yet 
that  the  prosecutor  is  not  shewn  to  be  entitled  to  what  he  asks,  such  is  a 
fatal  objection  to  the  substance  of  the  writ.(?/) 

"Where  the  law  casts  a  right  upon  the  prosecutor,  it  is  sufficient  to  state 
such  right  generally ;  but  if  he  claim  against  common  right,  he  must 

{t)  K.  V.  Hopkins,  4  P.  &  D.  550.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  161.f  In  R.  v.  Round,  4  A.  &  E. 
139. f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  427,f  the  official  character  of  the  defendant  appeared.  See 
post.  tits.  "  Supersedeas,"  "  Quashing  Writ,"  "  Quashing  Return." 

(m)  R.  t.  Leicestersh.  (J.),  1  M.  &  S.  444.     R.  v.  Bettesworth,  Stra.  857. 

(v)  R.  T.  Margate  Pier,  3  B.  &  A.  224.f     See  tits.  "  Supersedeas,"  "  Quashing," 

(w)  Ante,  p.  27,  28,  113,  n.  (</),  130,  n.  (Z),  and  infra,  "Mandatory  Clause."  R. 
T.  Oxford  (Ep.),  7  East,  345,  350.  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  3  A.  &  E.  539.1  S.  C.  5  N.  & 
M.  222.f  R.  V.  Oxford  (Ep.),  7  East,  600.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  7  East.  350.  S. 
C.  3  Smith,  341 ;  7  T.  R.  48,  53.  Peat's  case,  6  Mod.  310,  per  Holt,  C.  J.  R.  r. 
Nottingham  (J.),  2  Barn.  56.  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway.  4  P.  &  D.  46.  S.  C. 
10  A.  &  E.  569.f  R.  V.  Margate  Pier,  3  B.  &  A.  220.1  R.  v."  Newbury  (Mayor),  1 
Q.  B.  759.f  R.  V.  Coopers'  Company,  7  T.  R.  467.  See  tit.  "  Advocate  of  Doc- 
tors' Commons,"  and  the  several  titles  of  the  series,  and  post,  tit.  "  Quashing 
Writ." 

(z)  7  East,  345,  350,  supra,  n.  [le).  See  infra,  "  Mandatory  Clause."  And  ante, 
p.  143,  144. 

(y)  7  East,  350,  supra,  n.  (w). 


FORM,     ETC.  367 

shew  how.  Therefore,  where  in  a  niandaunis  to  an  archdeacon  to  admit 
and  swear  to  the  office  of  churchwarden,  it  was  hehl,  as  the  parishioners 
by  whose  election  the  prosecutor  ch^imed  could  only  have  a  right  to  elect 
a  churchwarden  by  custom,  that  such  custom  should  have  been  fully  stat- 
ed upon  the  writ. (,3) 

Where  a  statement  of  title  is  necessary,  the  averment  of  a  prima  facie 
one  is  sufficient  to  induce  a  return. (o)  Thus,  where  a  mandamus  to 
account  before  auditors,  under  the  Vestry  Act,  stat.  1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  60, 
averred,  "that  the  auditors  duly  appointed,  and  acting  under  and  by  vir- 
tue of  an  act,  &c.,  in  exercise  of  the  powers  given  to  them  by  the  said 
act,"  had  summoned  the  said  parties  to  account ;  it  was  held,  that  it  was 
not  necessary  to  state  more  fully  the  adoption  of  the  act  by  the  parish, 
and  the  due  appointment  of  auditors.(&)  So,  debito  modo  electus  is  all 
the  inducement  that  is  stated  in  a  writ  to  a  municipal  body,  to  admit  and 
swear  in  a  corporator. (c)  So,  where  a  writ  suggested,  that  the  applicant 
had  a  right  to  an  admission  to  an  office,  upon  payment  of  a  reasonable 
fine,  such  was  held  to  be  a  sufficient  allegation,  without  shewing  how,  or 
by  whom,  it  was  to  be  assessed. (c/) 

Where,  however,  the  circumstances  of  the  case  are  such,  that 
no  ^averment  of  title  is  necessary,  all  mention  of  it  should  be  •-         -• 
avoided.     Thus,  a  mandamus  to  restore,  should  not  shew  the  nature  of 
the  right  to  the  office. (e) 

.]     Averment  of  Defendant's  Dufi/,  d-.c. — The  writ  must  expressly 

state  the  act,  &c.,  or  those  facts  which  constitute  the  nature  of  the  duty, 
&c.,  required  to  be  performed  by  the  defendant,(/)  and  an  absence  of 
such  an  averment  will  render  the  writ  liable  to  be  either  superseded  or 
quashed. (</) 

The  writ  must  clearly  show  upon  its  face,  that  it  is  the  defendant" s 
duty  to  execute  it.(/«)  But  where  a  writ  of  mandamus  stated  the  election 
of  a  presentee  to  a  vicarage  by  a  majority,  and  commanded  the  Master, 
who  had  refused  to  affix  the  seal  to  the  appointment,  to  do  so,  it  was  held, 
that  an  allegation  in  the  writ  as  to  his  power  to  affix  the  seal,  was  suffi- 

(z)  Needham's  case,  Trem.  469;  7  East,  350,  supra.  Harris's  case,  Trem.  471. 
Dunkin's  case,  Id.  501.  Baker  v.  Baker,  Id.  505.  R.  v.  The  West  Riding  (J.),  7 
T.  R.  50.     R.  V.  Lyme  Regis  (Maj'or),  1  Doug.  80.     See  tit.  "  Custom." 

{a)  7  East,  351,  supra,  n.  (?«),  per  Ellenborougli,  C.  J.,  Peat's  case,  G  Mod.  310. 
R.  V.  Slatford,  5  Mod.  318,  per  Holt,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Coopers'  Company,  7  T.  R.  543. 
R.  V.  Tappenden,  3  East,  186.  R.  v.  Win,  2  Keb.  738.  742  ;  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v. 
Marclies  (President),  1  Lev.  306.     S.  C.  1  Vent.  110.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."C.  2. 

(6)  R.  T.  St.  Pancras,  3  A.  &  E.  535.t  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222  jf  7  East,  345, 
supra,  n.  {iv).     Peat's  case,  6  Mod.  310;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  3. 

(c)  7  East,  345,  supra,  n.  [w) ;  Trem.  Plac.  Cor.  467.  R.  v.  Dublin  (Dean), 
Stra.  536.     S.  C.  8  Mod.  27. 

{d)  R.  V.  Hastings  (Mayor),  Cas.  t.  Hard.  862  ;  Steph.  on  PI.  p.  409  ;  also  Cliit. 
on  PI.  tit.  "Inducement." 

(e)  R.  v.  Nottingham  (Mayor),  Say.  56.     See  ante,  p.  194,  n.  [v). 

(/)  Ante,  p.  29,  and  R.  v.  Ward  (Dr.),  Stra.  897,  and  see  tit.  "Office." 

[g)  See  post,  tits.  "  Supersedeas,"  "  Quashing  Writ,"  p.  335,  336. 

(A)  R.  V.  Dr.  Ward,  Stra.  893.  S.  C.  Fitzg.  123.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  252,  294 ;  Trem. 
Entr.  452,  453,  454.  R.  v.  Clapham,  1  Vent.  110.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  738,  742  ;  7  East, 
351,  347,  n.  (e).     R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  7  T.  R.  53. 


368  tapping's    mandamus. 

cicnt,  wliicli  stated,  that  he  had  the  custody  of  one  of  the  keys  of  the 
chest  in  which  it  was  kept,  and  had  positively  rcfui^icd  to  affix  the  seal, 
and  claimed  a  right  to  withhold  it.(<') 

The  writ  need  not  particularly  set  forth  by  what  authority  the  defen- 
dant's duty  exists. (.7)  Thus,  a  mandamus  to  a  commissary  to  admit  a 
deputy  registrar,  which  stated  quod  minus  rite  recusavit,  has  been  held 
to  be  sufficient,  though  it  was  objected,  that  it  did  not  state  the  defen- 
dant's right  to  admit.(A:)  So,  a  mandamus  to  a  dean  to  grant  probate, 
which  averred  that  the  dean,  juxta  juris,  exigentiam  recusavit,  has  been 
holden  sufficient,  though  it  was  objected,  that  it  did  not  show  the  dean's 
title  to  grant  probate,  by  an  allegation  that  there  were  bona  notabilia.(^) 

The  w'rit  must  with  great  certainty  call  the  attention  of  the  defendant 
to  his  duty,  and  to  the  execution  of  the  writ,  otherwise  it  may  be  quash- 
ed for  insufficiency  in  substance. (?n)  Thus,  the  Court  has  quashed  a  writ 
of  mandamus,  which  commanded  a  bishop  to  license  J.  R.  to  be  chaplain 
or  curate  of  the  church  or  chapel  of  P.,  upon  the  bare  averment  that  he 
had  been  duly  nominated  and  appointed,  by  the  inJialitants  of  the  town- 
&hip  of  P.  ;  no  consent  of  the  rector,  nor  any  custom  or  endowment,  which 
r*'-^9^l  ^is^t  render  such  nomination  effectual  of  *itself,  being  alleged. 
Lord  Ellenborough,  in  his  judgment,  said,  "  the  bishop  it  required 
by  this  writ  to  do  an  act  which  he  is  alleged  to  have  refused  to  do,  in 
breach  of  his  duty;  the  writ  therefore  should  have  stated  those  facts, 
which  constituted  his  duty."(«) 

.]     Demand  and  Refusal. — The  writ  should  shew  expressly  by 

the  averment  of  a  demand  and  refusal,  or  an  equivalent,  that  the  prosecu- 
tor, before  his  application  to  the  Court,  did  all  in  his  power  to  obtain  re-< 
dress. (o)  )  The  Court  has,  however,  during  an  argument,  ordered  the  writ 
to  be  amended,  by  the  insertion  of  an  averment  of  "  demand  and  refusal," 
in  order  that  such  argument  might  proceed  independently  of  the  objec- 
tion. (7;) 

.]     Averment  of  ahsence  of  a  specific  leyal  remedy. — The    writ 

should  shew  that  it  is  the  appropriate  remcdy,(5')  and  it  should  allege  that 
the  prosecutor  cannot  have  redress  by  the  ordinary  legal  remedies,  other- 

(0  R.  T.  Kendall,  4  P.  &  D.  603.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  366.f  S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  X.  S.  137, 
Q.  B. 

( ;■)  Bull.  N.  P.  200.  [h)  R.  v.  Ward  (Dr.),  Stra.  89C. 

(/)  R.  V.  "Ward  (Dr.),  Stra.  857.     S.  C.  Fitzg.  123  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  200. 

[m)  R.  V.  Bri.-tol  Dock,  9  D.  &  R.  SlO.f  'S.  C.  6  B.  &  C.  181,t  per  Bayley,  J.  R. 
V.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  531.j  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.  See  infra, 
tit.  "Mandatory  Clause." 

(n)  R.  T.  Oxford  (Ep.),  7  East,  345;  3  A.  &  E.  530.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222,f 
supra.     R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  569.f     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48. 

(o)  R.  V.  Dr.  Ward,  1  Barn.  411.  R.  v.  Doncaster,  there  cited.  R.  v.  Kendall,  1 
Q.  B.  36G.f  S.  0.  4  P.  &  D.  602,  See  ante,  "  Demand  and  Refusal,"  and  post,  tits. 
"Supersedeas."  "  Quashing  AVrit." 

[p)  R.  V.  Newbury  .(Mayor),  1  Q.  B.  739.f  S.  C.  1  G.  k  D.  388.  S.  C.  2  Jur.  812. 
See  post,  tit.  "  Amendment  of  Writ." 

(y)  Anon.,  2  Salk.  525.  Tawny's  case.  2  Salk.  531.  S.  C.Ld^aym.  1009,  S. 
C.  6  Mod.  98.     And  see  post,  tit.  "  Quashing  Writ,"  p.  3«6.  3^6 


FORM,    ETC. 


369 


wise  it  may  be  quashed  for  insufficiency  ;(/•)  for  a,^  ttc  fundamental  prin- 
ciple as  to  the  dispensation  of  the  writ  is,  that  there  exists  no  specific 
le'^al  remedy  whereby  the  prosecutor  can  have  redress,  so  it  is  clear  that 
the  writ  should  state  that  most  material  fact  distinctly,  in  order  that  the 
defendant  be  not  improperly  deprived  of  the  power  of  putting  such  fact  in 
issue.  Thus,  where  a  writ  of  mandamus,  which  commanded  a  corporation 
to  pay  a  poor  rate,  omitted  to  state  that  it  had  no  effects  upon  which  a 
distress  could  be  levied,  such  omission  was  held  to  be  a  fatal  objection  to 
the  writ,  and  one  that  might  be  taken  after  the  filing  of  the  return,  or  at 
any  time  before  the  issuing  of  the  peremptory  mandamus.(s) 

.]      The  Mandatory  ClauRc. — Too  much  care  cannot  be  bestowed 

upon  the  proper  framing  of  this  portion  of  the  writ,  for  the  prosecutor  is 
rigidly  bound  by  it;  the  rule  upon  this  point  being,  that  the  writ  must  be 
enforced  in  the  terms  in  which  it  has  issued,  or  not  at  all.(/) 

*As  to  the  substance  of  the  clause,  the  primary  rule  is,  that  it  r*30j^-| 
muat  not  include  more  than  one  case,  whether  of  the  same,  or  of 
muny  individualsjiov  two  or  more  distinct  rights  cannot  be  joined  in  the 
same  mandamus ;  if,  therefore,  the  distinct  rights  of  two  or  more  persons 
be  so  improperly  joined,  the  writ  is  liable  to  be  either  superseded  or 
quashed. («)  Thus,  where  nine  persons  joined  in  a  writ  to  be  restored  to 
an  office,  the  Court,  when  quashing  it,  said,  '•'■  Several  mandamuses  ought 
to  have  been  brought,  for,  perhaps,  they  (the  prosecutors)  were  chosen  at 
different  times ;  the  election  of  one  is  not  the  election  of  another,  the 
amotion  of  one  is  not  the  amotion  of  the  other,  and  moreover  it  may  be 
for  several  faults,  one  for  forfeiture,  the  other  for  other  reasons."(v)  So, 
if  such  mandatory  clause  should  command  the  admission  of  all  j^ersons 
having  a  right,  it  would,  for  the  same  reason,  be  either  supersedeable,  or 
liable  to  be  quashed. («•)  Thus,  in  a  case  where  the  rule  absolute  for  the 
writ  was  to  command  a  mayor  "to  assemble  and  do  the  business  of  the 
corporation,"  but  the  writ  commanded  the  mayor,  &c.  "  to  assemble  and 

(r)  R.  T.  Shepton  Mallet  (Overseers).  5  Mod.  421.  R.  v.  Hopkins,  4  P.  &  D.  550. 
S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  lei.f  R.  V.  Round,  4  A.  &  E.  ISD.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  427  ■,f  Com. 
Dio-.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  3.  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  531.f  S.  C.  4 
P.  &  D.  48.  S.  C.  1  Rail.  Cas.  509.  R.  v.  England  (Bank),  2  Doug.  256.  S.  C.  2 
B.  &  A.  620,  eSO.f 

As  to  what  is  a  specific  legal  remedy,  see  ante.  p.  18 — 21. 

(,v)  R.  V.  Margate  Pier,  3  B.  &  A.  220.1  S.  C.  2  Chit.  256.t  See  post,  tit.  "Quash- 
ing Writ,"  p.  336. 

(I)  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  3  A.  &  E.  542.t  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222.t  R.  v.  Leicester 
(J.),  4  B.  &  C.  891.     S.  C.  7  D.  &  R.  370.t     See  ante,  p.  305,  n.  {</). 

\s  to  writs  peremptory  in  the  first  instance,  see  post,  tit.  "Peremptory  Writ." 

(u)  R.  y.  Kingston-upon-Ilull  (Mayor),  11  Mod.  382.  S.  C.  Stra.  578.  S.  C.  8 
Mod.  209.  Anon.,  2  Salk.  433,  436.'  R.  y.  Chester  (City),  5  Mod.  10,  11.  S.  C. 
Comb.  307.  S.  C.  Holt,  438.  R.  v.  Montacute,  1  W.  Blac.  60;  Stra.  578,n.  R.  v. 
Andover  (Town\  12  Mod.  332.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  433.  S.  C.  Holt,  441,  and  cases 
there  cited.  Butler  v.  Re\ys,  12  Mod.  349  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  2  ;  Bac.  Abr. 
tit  "Man."  (B.)     See  post.  tits.  "  Supersedeas,"  "Quashing  Writ,"  p.  335,  336. 

'(v)  See  ante,  p.  101,  n.  («').  R.  v.  Chester  (City),  Comb.  307.  S.  C.  Holt,  438. 
S.  C.  5  Mod.  11.  R.  V.  Physicians' (Coll.),  Burr.  2742.  See  tit.  "Councillor'^'' 
(Restoration,  Form  of  Writ). 

(w)  R.  v.  Kingston  (Mayor),  Stra.  578 :  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  2. 

June,  1852.— 24 


370  TArPING's     MANDAMUS. 

admit  all  persons  having  a  right  to  their  freedom  who  should  appear  be- 
fore them  to  demand  it/'  such  writ  was,  on  motion,  superseded,  as  being 
complicated,  and  because  every  person's  right  was  distinct. (./) 

The  above  rule  as  to  singleness  of  interest  obtains,  although  the  prose- 
cutors may  have  been  successors  in  the  same  office,  in  respect  of  which  the 
claims  arise. (;/) 

The  same  writ  may,  however,  command  several  persons  to  be  admitted 
to  an  office,  if  in  the  aggregate  they  form  but  one  officer,  as  bailiff,  sheriff, 
&c. ;  but  not,  as  before  stated,  several  persons  into  several  offices  of  the 
same  kind,  as  aldermen,  common  councilmen,  &c.,  for,  in  the  latter  cases, 
each  must  have  a  separate  writ.(^:) 

P^qoc-i  *The  same  writ  may  command  several  persons  to  do  several 
acts,  if  the  performance  of  all  such  acts  be  necessary,  in  order 
that  the  ultimate  object  of  the  writ  may  be  obtained.  Thus,  where  a 
Court  Leet,  by  custom,  presented  to  the  steward  the  person  whom  the 
commonalty  had  chosen  to  be  mayor,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  granted  a  writ 
to  command  the  steward  to  hold  a  Court  Leet,  and  to  the  burgesses  to 
attend  it,  and  to  present  him  who  had  been  chosen  mayor.(a)  So,  all 
matters  which  are  incidental  or  necessary  to  the  primary  object  of  the 
writ,  may  be  commanded  by  its  mandatory  clause.  Thus,  a  writ,  the 
primary  object  of  which  is  to  compel  the  hearing  of  an  appeal,  usually 
and  properly  commands  the  sessions  or  recorder  to  enter  the  appeal,  or  to 
enter  continuances  and  hear  and  determine  the  merits  of  the  appeal,  and 
also,  if  the  facts  of  the  case  warrant  it,  to  take  the  recognizances  of  the 
applicant  and  his  sureties  for  trying  such  appeal,  and  thereupon  forthwith 
to  discharge  him  out  of  custody,  &c.(&) 

The  writ  may  command  the  doing  of  an  act  at  the  instance  of  one 
prosecutor,  although  the  performance  of  such  act  may  have  the  effect  of 
perfecting  the  rights  of  several  persons. (c) 

The  mandatory  clause  has  no  peculiar  formula ;  if,  therefore,  the  legal 
construction  of  the  language,  whatever  it  may  be,  shews  to  the  Court 
that  the  prosecutor  is  entitled  to  that  which  he  seeks  by  the  writ,  it  will 
be  sufficient. 

The  mandatory  clause  differs  materially  in  substance  as  between  the 
cases  of  judicial,  and  ministerial  acts.  Thus,  in  the  former  case,  it  com- 
mands generally,  and  not  specifically,  as  "  to  give  sentence,"  without 
saying  "what  sentence;"  in  the  latter  case,  however,  the  terms  of  the 

(z)  See  ante,  p.  93,  n.  [u)  \  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  B.  R.  v.  Wildman,  Stra. 
893.     R.  V.  Kingston  (Mayor),  Stra.  578.     S.  C.  8  Mod.  209.     S.  C.  11  Mod.  382. 

(v)  Ex  parte  Scott,  8  D.  328  ;  4  Jur.  579. 

(z)  Ante,  p.  101,  (w).  R.  v.  Ipswicli  (Bailiffs)  1  Barn.  407.  R.  v.  Bridgewater 
(Corp.),  3  Doug.  382  ;  Stra.  1180  ;  8  East,  271.     R.  v.  Twitty,  2  Salk.  434. 

(a)  Ante,  p.  150,  n.  {x).  R.  v.  Middlehurst  (Borough),  1  Wils.  283.  R.  v.  Christ- 
church  (Borough),  Bull.  N.  P.  200.     See  tit.  "Manor"  (Leet). 

{b)  Ante,  p.  232,  n.  [a).  R.  v.  Newcastle  (J.),  I  B.  &,  Ad.  933. f  R.  v.  Abing- 
don, Ld.  Raym.  559.     S.  C.  2  Salk.  699. 

(c)  R.  V.  Ld.  Montacute,  T.,  24  Geo.  2  ;  1  W.  Blac.  60.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  283;  BuU. 
N.  P.  196;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.) 


FORM,     ETC.  371 

clause  arc  specific,  as  "  to  swear  in  A.  B.  as  churchwarden,"  and  not 
generally  "to  swear  in  a  churchwarden. "((/) 

Where  the  object  of  the  writ  is  to  command  the  execution  of  the 
provisions  of  an  act  of  Parliament,  kc,  the  language  of  such  act  should 
he  adopted,  (r) 

As  to  the  form  of  mandatory  clause  in  the  case  of  a  discretionary 
power,  see  title  Discretion. {/) 

*If  restitution  he  sought  to  an  office,  which  is  not  one  of  profit,  r*32Q-i 
but  of  freedom  and  government  merely,  as  that  of  alderman,  the 
mandatory  clause  should  not  allege  it  to  be  a  place  of  profit,  for  all  the 
precedents  of  such  writs  are  without  any  suggestion  of  pecuniary  loss ;  it 
is  a  sufficient  ground  for  the  writ,  that  there  has  been  a  loss  of  "jjrece- 
denci/"  or  ''  author i(>/.'\g) 

In  all  cases  of  franchise,  the  writ  should  command  admission,  restora- 
tion, &c.  to  the  ^^ privilege,  <£-c.,"  and  not  to  the  "place  and  office,  &c.;" 
as  to  the  "privilege"  of  freeman. (A) 

The  mandatory  clause  usually  does,  and  properly  should,  always  con- 
tain an  alternative  sentence, (i)  which  was  formerly,  when  the  writs  were 
in  Latin,  expressed  thus,  "  si  ita  est,"  or  "  si  vobis  constare  poterit,"  or 
"vel  causam  nobis  significes;"  the  legal  signification  of  which  sentences 
is,  that  the  mandatory  part  of  the  writ  is  to  be  obeyed,  only  if  it  can 
legally  be  commanded. (7)  The  existence  of  such  alternative  clause  is 
not  necessary  to  the  validity  of  the  writ,  it  having  been  first  held,  that  the 
writ  was  sufficient  without  such  words,  if  there  were  other  words,  as 
"  sicut  informamur,"  which  shewed  that  the  writ  was  not  a  peremptory 
one,(y!.'),  and  afterwards  that  the  writ,  being  a  mandatory  writ,  the  person 
to  whom  it  is  directed  ought  to  make  a  return  or  obey,  although  there  be 
no  such  clause,  nor  any  equivalent  expression. (?) 

The  mandatory  clause  must  be  supported  by,  and  not  exceed  in  legal 
value  the  averments  of  title,  grievance,  &c.  forming  the  inducement  of 
the  writ.(??i)  Thus,  where  a  writ  commanded  "  aldermen  and  common- 
alty" to  elect,  &c.,  which  direction  was  not  a  command  to  the  body  by 

{d)  See  ante,  p.  13,  n.  (a),  (6),  (c),  112,  n.  [w),  185,  n.  [q),  (r),  and  tits.  "Lec- 
tureship" (License),  "Office"  (Officers,  Judicial,  &c.),  "Visitor." 

(e)  See  tit.  "Act  of  Parliament,"  and  ante,  p.  314,  n.  [d). 

If)  See  ante,  p.  12—15. 

{g)  See  ante,  p.  37,  n.  {n),  101,  n.  [u),  191,  n.  (a),  194,  n.  [v).  See  tit.  '•  Prece- 
dence." 

(A)  Supra,  n.  [g),  and  see  tit.  "Freeman"  (Restoration,  Writ). 

[i)  The  alternative  clause  is  said  to  have  been  first  introduced  in  Bagg's  case,  11 
Rep.  93.     See  post,  tit.  "  Peremptory  Writ." 

ij)  Ante,  p.  G,  n.  (w),  TO,  n.  («).  R.  v.  Heathcote,  10  Mod.  53.  Thompson  v. 
Edmonds,  T.,  4  Jac.  B.  R. ;  2  Roll.  Ab.  456,  pi.  4 ;  2  Dyer,  332  (6),  n.  28). 

Uc)  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Mod.  233,  236.  S.  C.  Comb.  279,  280.  S.  C.  Holt, 
436.  S.  C.  Skin.  359,  386  ;  4  Mod.  241,  n.  (a) ;  but  see  London  (City)  v.  Swallow, 
2  Keb.  50,  76.  c,   ^    tt  ^. 

{I)  R.  V.  Owen,  5  Mod.  314.  S.  C.  Comb.  239.  S.  C.  Skin.  669.  S.  C.  Holt, 
190  :  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (C.  3).  t    ».  -n 

[m]  Ante,  p.  320,  322.  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  6  A.  &  E.  316.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
507.t 


372  tapping's   mandamus. 

its  corporate  name;  also  by  the  charter  upon  which  the  writ  was  founded, 
some  of  the  com iiionalty  were  excepted;  it  was  held,  that  as  the  man- 
datory clause  extended  beyond  the  persons  who  were  entitled  under  the 
charter  to  concur  in  the  election,  so  the  writ  was  repugnant,  and  there- 
fore void.(ji) 

The  mandatory  clause  should,  like  the  body  of  the  writ,  expressly  state 
r*^971  *^^^*^  ^^^^^  required  of  the  defendant, (o)  and  with  great  certainty 
•-  call  his  attention  to  it.(p) 

The  mandatory  clause  must  not  only  clearly  and  accurately  express 
that  which  it  commands  the  defendant  to  do,  but  such  command  must  not 
exceed,  but  be  in  exact  conformity  with  the  legal  obligation  of  the  defen- 
dant, or  the  Court  will,  on  motion,  quash  it,  for  the  Court  cannot  mould 
the  writ  as  it  would  the  rule.  Thus,  in  a  case  arising  on  the  Vestry  Act, 
stat.  1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  60,  which  enacts,  that  the  auditors  shall  meet  twice 
at  least  in  each  year  at  the  board  room  of  the  vestry,  and  a  majority  of 
the  said  auditors  being  present  at  such  meetings,  shall  audit  the  accounts 
of  such  vestry,  and  the  vestry  are  required  "  at  every  such  meeting"  to 
produce  a  true  account  in  writing,  &c.,  and  the  auditors  are  to  have  the 
same  power  of  examining  the  accounts  of  certain  other  boards,  and  are  to 
audit  them  in  the  same  manner.  A  mandamus  issued,  calling  upon  a 
board  to  attend  with,  and  produce  to  the  auditors  their  accounts,  at  such 
time  and  place,  or  at  such  times  and  places,  as  a  majority  of  the  auditors 
might  appoint,  and  then  and  there  give  such  information  as  to  the  ac- 
counts as  they  might  be  enabled  to  give,  "according  tojjie  directions  of 
the  act."  It  was  held,  that  the  writ  exceeded  the  authority  given  by  the 
act  of  Parliament,  and  that  the  generality  of  the  command  was  not  qua- 
lified by  the  words  "  according  to  the  directions  of  the  said  act,"  as  such 
expression  required  the  defendant  to  look  dehors  the  writ,  in  order  to 
ascertain  the  duty  which  was  required  of  him. (5) 

{  Such  accuracy  is  necessary,  notwithstanding  the  writ  may  contain  a 
recital  properly  stating  and  limiting  the  right,  as  its  generality  cannot  be 
satisfied  by  obeying  a  limited  requisition  stated  in  a  recital,  and  because 
the  defendant  is  not  bound  to  refer  to  any  part  but  the  mandatory  clause, 
in  order  to  ascertain  what  is  required  of  him.(y)  /  Therefore,  where  a 
mandamus  is  awarded  for  purposes  partly  legal  and  partly  not,  as  where 

(«)  Ante,  p.  316.  E.  v.  Smith,  2  M.  &  S.  597.  See  post,  tits.  "Supersedeas," 
"Quashing  Writ,"  p.  335,336. 

(0)  Ante,  p.  322,  323.     R.  v.  Ward,  (Dr.),  Stra.  897. 

(V)  Ante,  p.  322,  n.  (m).  R.  v.  Bristol  Dock,  9  D.  &  R.  309.  S.  C.  6  B.  &  C. 
181,1  per  Bayley,  J. 

(q)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  3  A.  k  E.  535.1  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222.t  R.  v.  Tucker,  3  B. 
&  C  547.t  S.  C.  5  D.  &  R.  434.1  R.  y.  St.  Pancras,  6  A.  &  E.  316.t  S.  C.  1  N. 
&  P  507.+  R.  V.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  2  Q.  B.  569.1  S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  1  ;  but 
see  R.  V.  Bristol  Dock,  6  B.  &  C.  ISl.f  S.  C.  9  D.  &  R.  SOQ.f  The  objection 
should  not  be  taken  advantage  of  by  a  return  in  the  nature  of  a  demurrer,  but  by 
motion  to  quash.  R.  v.  Suffolk  (J.),  5  N.  &  M.  144,t  per  Patteson,  J.  York  Rail- 
way V.  Milner,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  379,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Stamp  Commissioners,  IG  L.  J.,  X. 
S.  75,  Q.  B.;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  B.  See  post,  tits.  "  Supersedeas,"  "  Quashing 
Writ." 

(r)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  G  A.  &  E.  SlG.f     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  507.t 


FORM,    ETC.  S73 

a  writ  exceeds  an  obligation  imposed  on  the  *dcfendant  by  an  act  p^-o^-^n-, 
of  Parliament,  &c.,  the  Court  will  not  in  part  enforce  it  by  a  i-  J 
peremptory  writ  limiting  its  effect,  but  will  quash  it ;  for  although  the 
Court  will,  for  the  purpose  of  justice,  mould  the  rule  for  the  writ,  yet  it 
cannot  mould  the  writ  itself  ;(.s)  also,  the  writ  must  be  executed  in  the 
terms  in  which  it  has  issued,  or  not  at  all.(^) 

The  word  ^^ fo7-thivitli,"  so  frequently  used  in  the  mandatory  clause, 
does  not  mean  that  the  defendant  is  to  perform  or  do  instantly  all  that  is 
required,  but  that  he  is  to  set  about  the  performance,  &c.  directly,  and 
do  at  once  all  that  can  be  done.(??) 

The  final  sentence  of  the  mandatory  clause,  exclusive  of  the  teste  and 
date,  is,  "and  how  you  shall  have  executed  this  our  writ,  make  known 

to  us  at  Westminster,  on the day  of (Return  day),  then 

returning  to  us  this  our  said  writ,"  which  last  eight  words  are  those 
which  render  necessary  the  service  of  the  original  writ  on  the  defendant, 
or  on  one  of  them  if  more  than  one,  in  order  that  he  may  file  it.(i;) 

Having  noticed  the  several  material  averments  and  the  mandatory 
clause  of  the  writ,  it  remains  to  add,  that  if  any  of  those  averments  be 
omitted,  or  the  writ  be  repugnant,  or  stultify  itself,  or  be  vitious  for  any 
defect  apparent  upon  the  face  of  it,  it  is  said  in  the  language  of  lawyers 
to  be  felo  do  se,  for  which  defect  it  is  liable,  if  not  amenable,  to  be  either 
superseded  or  quashed. (?«)  Thus,  a  writ  has' been  said  to  be  felo  de  se, 
which  shewed  that  there  was  a  general  visitor,  and  that  the  object  of  the 
writ  was  entirely  within  his  jurisdiction  ;(x)  which  writ  the  Court  quashed, 
notwithstanding  it  commanded  the  doing  of  that  which  the  visitor  had 
required,  for  where  there  is  a  visitor,  the  Court  has  no  power  ;  which  rule 
prevails,  whether  the  King,  or  a  private  individual,  be  the  visitor,  (y) 

.]      Teste  and  Return  Day. — Rule  8  of  the  Crown  Ofl&ce  Rules 

which  abrogates  the  practice  under  Rule,  M.  T.,  4  Ann.,  thus  provides 
for  the  teste  and  return  of  the  writ  of  mandamus,  "  Every  writ  of  ^jt^.^^, 
*mandamus  shall  be  tested  and  made  returnable  on  a  day  certain  '•  -• 
before  the  Queen  at  Westminster,  and  there  shall  be  eight  days  at  least 
between  the  teste  and  return  of  every  such  writ  of  mandamus,  where  the 
act  required  to  be  done  is  in  London,  or  within  forty  miles  thereof,  and 

(s)  Ante,  p.  16,  n.  («).  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  3  A.  &  E.  535.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222. f 
R.  V.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  562.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.  R.  v.  Thames 
Commissioners,  5  A.  &  E.  815. f     See  post,  tit.  "  Quashing  Writ." 

(t)  Ante,  p.  323,  n.  {{). 

(u)  R.  V.  Ouze  Bank  (Commrs.),  3  A.  &  E.  550,f  per  Patteson,  J.  See  R.  v. 
Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  556.f     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48. 

(t))  See  post,  tit.  "  Filing  the  Writ." 

As  early  as  the  reign  of  Hen.  2,  it  was  usual  for  writs  to  contain  the  clause,  "  Et 
habeas  ibi  hoc  breve."     Glan.  Lib.  1,  cc.  13,  14,  15,  &c. ;  Lib.  2,  c.  2,  &c. 

(w)  See  post,  tits.  "  Supersedeas,"  "  Quashing  Writ,"  p.  335,  336. 

[z)  Dr.  Walker's  Cas.  t.  Hard.  218,  219,  per  Lee,  J.  See  R.  v.  Sparrow,  1  Mod. 
395,  per  Lee,  C.  J.,  and  R.  v.  Newbury  (Mayor),  2  G.  &  D.  109.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  751.1 
S.  C.  6  Jur.  821. 

(y)  Dr.  Walker's  case,  Andr.  178,  in  marg.;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (B.)  See 
post,  tits.  "  Supersedeas,"  "  Quashing  Writ,"  p.  335,  336. 


374  tapping's    mandamus.. •• 

fourteen  days  in  all  other  cases."  (2)  The  practice  which  obtained  previ- 
ously to  the  making  of  the  above  rule,  required  that  the  writ  must  have 
been  tested  in  Term ;  and  if  not,  the  Court  always,  upon  motion,  either 
superseded  or  quashed  it,(a)  and  refused  to  award  an  alias,  but  in  general 
granted  a  new  writ. 

The  number  of  days  between  the  teste  and  return  remains  unaltered 
by  the  above  rule  ;(i)  that  of  M.  T.,  4  Ann.,  which  regulated  the  previous 
practice  on  this  point,  though  not  couched  in  the  same  terms  as  the  new 
rule,  yet  is  expressed  in  language,  the  legal  effect  of  which  appears  to  be 
the  same.  By  a  decision  upon  the  rule,  M.  T.,  4  Ann.,  it  has  been  held, 
that  notwithstanding  the  words  "  at  least,"  the  proper  time  is  "  one  day 
inclusive  and  the  other  exclusive,"  so  that  a  writ  tested  on  the  14th 
might  have  been  returnable  on  the  28th. (c) 

The  writ,  although  it  may  not  be  tested  of  a  day  prior  to  that  on  which 
it  was  granted  by  the  Com-t,(d)  yet  in  practice  it  is  tested  on  the  same 
day  on  which  the  rule  absolute  for  the  writ  bears  date,(e)  whether  the 
rule  has  been  made  absolute  in  the  Term  in  which  the  writ  may  have 
issued  or  not,  in  other  words  the  writ  ought  to  bear  date  the  same  day  as 
the  rule  absolute,  and  to  date  with  any  other  date  is  a  misprision. (/) 

The  Court  will,  in  its  discretion,  amend  the  writ  if  improperly  tested  in 
Vacation  notwithstanding  a  return  may  have  been  made.(f/) 

The  Court  has  and  will  on  a  proper  case  dispense  with  the  above 
rule  and  direct  the  return  to  be  made  within  a  shorter  time.  But  if 
^without  the  special  direction  of  the  Court,  the  mandamus  be 
[  ^^^J  drawn  up  so  as  to  allow  less  time  than  the  rule  requires  between 
the  teste  and  the  return,  the  Court  will  supersede  the  writ  for  irregularity, 
though  the  rule  upon  which  the  writ  was  granted  may  have  been  absolute 
in  the  first  instance. (A) 

.]     Endorsement. — The  writ,  when  prepared  and  settled  must  be 

(z)  See  Cr.  Off.  Rul.,  App. 

(a)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.)  Moneyer's  case,  1  Sid.  304.  S.  C.  nom.  E.  v. 
Starling,  2  Keb.  91  ;  Stra.  539.  Grey  v.  Willoughby,  Moore,  465,  pi.  657.  Champion 
V.  Skipweth,  1  Sid.  308.  See  Briefe  Fitzh.  203  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  4.  See 
form  of  teste.  R.  v.  St.  Andrew's  (Parish),  7  A.  &  E.  284.t  S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D. 
395 ;  1  Jur.  706.  R.  v.  Conyers,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  300,  Q.  B.  And  as  to  form  of 
ancient  teste,  ante,  p.  267,  n.  {i).  See  post,  tits.  "Supersedeas,"  "Quashing' 
Writ." 

(b)  See  R.  v.  Dover  (Mayor),  St.  407.  Anon.,  2  Salk.  434,  where  see  method  of 
computation  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  4. 

(c)  Anon.,  2  Salk.  434 ;  Stra.  407  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  C.  4.  R.  v.  St.  An- 
drew's Parish,  7  A.  &  E.  281.t  See  rule  7  A.  &  E.  283,1  n.  (6),  and  11  Mod.  64,  65, 
the  operation  of  which  rule  was  not  confined  to  corporations,  7  A.  &  E.  284. f 

(d)  Anon.,  2  Salk.  434,  15.  See  R.  v.  St.  Andrew's  (Parish),  7  A.  &  E.  281.f 
S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  395. 

(e)  R.  V.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  402.t     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524.f     Anon.,  2  Barn,  236.1 
(/)  R.  V.  Conyers,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  300,  Q.  B.  Supra,  n.  [e) 

(0)  R.  v.  Conyers,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  300,  Q.  B.  See  post,  tit.  "  Amendment." 
(h)  R.  V.  St.  Andrew's  (Parish),  7  A.  &  E.  281.t  S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  395  ;  1  Jur. 
706.  The  Court  there  awarded  an  alias  writ,  but  it  is  apprehended  that  the  defec- 
tive writ  should,  in  accordance  with  practice,  have  been  quashed.  Sterling's  case, 
1  Sid.  304.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  91.  Grey  v.  Willoughby,  Moore,  465,  pi.  657.  See  post, 
tit.  "Supersedeas,"  &c. 


FOEM,    ETC.  375 

engrossed  on  parctment  by  the  prosecutor's  attorney,  or  (if  in  person)  by 
the  party  suing  out  the  same,  and  endorsed  with  the  name  and  address  of 
such  attorney  or  party  suing  out  the  same ;  it  is  also  usual  to  endorse  on 
it  "  By  rule  of  Court." 

.]     Hoiv  sued  out. — The   writ,  in  order  to  be  sued  out,  must  be 

taken  to  the  Crown  Office,  together  with  the  rule  absolute,  and  on  pay- 
ment of  5s.,  the  proper  officer  will  sign  it,  impress  it  with  a  stamp  there 
kept  for  that  purpose,  and  make  an  entry  or  minute  of  the  issuing  of  such 
writ,  together  with  the  name  and  address  of  the  attorney  or  party  issuing 
the  same,  in  a  book  also  there  kept  for  that  purpose. («')  Thence  it  must 
be  taken,  as  in  the  case  of  an  ordinary  Queen's  Bench  writ  of  summons, 
to  the  Seal  Office,  to  be  there  sealed. 

.]  ILnv  acrccd. — The  writ  should  be  served  personally,  (if  possi- 
ble), upon  him  or  them  to  whom  it  is  directed. (y) 

The  prosecutor's  attorney  should,  if  there  be  several  defendants,  make 
so  many  copies  of  the  writ  as  may  be  requisite  for  service,  reserving  one 
copy  for  himself.  If  the  writ  be  directed  to  one  person  only,  the  original 
should  be  personally  served  on  such  person :  but  should  it  be  directed  to 
several  persons,  the  original  should  be  delivered  to  him  whese  duty  it  is 
to  make  the  return,  and  return  the  writ,  as  the  mayor,  &c.,  and  a  copy 
merely  served  upon  the  others  at  the  same  time  showing  to  them  the 
original. (7^)  Thus  the  service  of  a  writ  of  mandamus  upon  a  municipal 
corporation  should  be  effected  by  the  delivery  of  the  writ  to  the  mayor,  he 
being  the  most  visible  part  of  the  *corporation,(/)  and  a  copy  to  p^qoiT 
the  other  officers  at  the  same  time  shewing  to  them  the  original  L  ^ 
writ.  The  writ  itself  should,  in  general,  be  personally  served  as  above 
noticed,  for  it  is  expressly  stated  therein  that  it  must  be  returned  to  the 
Court,  which  cannot  be  unless  the  defendant  or  one  of  them,  if  more  than 
one,  be  so  served. (?)i)  If,  however,  personal  services  of  the  writ  may  not 
have  been  efflscted,  there  should  be  personal  service  of  the  side  bar  rule 
to  return  the  writ,  otherwise  an  attachment  cannot  be  obtained. («) 

Personal  service  of  the  writ,  though  in  general  necessary,  has,  in  some 
cases  been  dispensed  with.(o)     Thus  where  a  mandamus  had  been  granted 

(z)Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  B. ;  C.  Off.  Rules,  r.  2,  App.  The  hours  of  attendance 
at  the  Crown  Office  are  from  11  a.  m.  to  3  p.  m.  during  the  Vacation,  and  from  11 
a.  m.  to  5  p.  m.  in  Term  time,  except  between  10th  August  and  24th  October, 
when  the  oSice  closes  at  two  o'clock. 

(j)  R.  V.  Exeter  (Mayor),  12  Mod.  251.     See  supra,  tit.  "  Direction." 

\k)  Ante,  p.  328,  n.  [v).  R.  v.  Exeter  (Maj-or),  12  Mod.  251,  and  cases  there  cited ; 
6  Mod.  152.  R.  V.  Fowey  (Mayor),  4  D.  &  R.  139.f  S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  684,f  and  see 
the  service  in  R.  v.  Cambridge,  (Mayor,)  4  Q.  B.  802.f  As  to  other  services  see  the 
several  titles  throughout  the  Work.  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  183.  And  post,  tit.  "  Attach- 
ment." 

U)  R.  V.  Chapman,  6  Mod.  152.  R.  v.  Esham  (Mayor),  2  Barn.  265. 

\m)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  183,  ante,  p.  328,  n.  (i'),  and  supra,  n.  (A"). 

(;i)  R.  V.  North  Riding  (J.),  7  Q.  B.  ISS.f  Corner's  Crown  Prac.  227,  228.  R.  v. 
Fowey  (Mayor),  5  D.  &  R.  614.f  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  132.f  S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  584  ;f 
Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  183.     See  post,  tit.  "  Return"  (When  to  be  made.) 

(o)  R.  V.  Fowey  (Mayor),  5  D.  &  R.  GH.f  S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  584.f  S.  G.  4  D.  &R. 
132. f    See  supra,  n.  (/). 


376  TArriNo's    mandamus. 

for  an  election  uuder  stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  s.  2,  and  a  rule  made  that 
public  notice  sliould,  according  to  the  provisions  of  that  act,  be  affixed  in 
the  market  place,  Avhieh  was  accordingly  done,  the  Court  granted  an 
attachment  for  disobedience,  against  a  member  of  the  corporation,  who  had 
been  served  with  a  copy  of  the  rule,  notwithstanding  neither  the  original 
mandamus  nor  the  rule  had  been  shewn  to  him  at  the  time  of  such  service, 
for  the  public  notice  directed  by  the  act  is  prima  facie  sufficient.  The 
application  for  the  attachment  would,  however,  have  been  well  answered, 
if  the  party  could  have  shewn  that  he  had  no  notice  of  the  manda- 
mus, (p) 

.]     Filinj  the  Writ. — The  original  writ,  together  with  the  return 

made  thereto,  must  be  filed  by  the  defendant  upon  whom  it  has  been  served, 
at  the  Crown  Office,  according  to  the  exigency  of  such  writ,  on  or  before 
the  day  of  the  return  thereof,  under  pain  of  an  attachment. (j)  A  motion 
to  file  the  writ  is  not  now  necessary,  it  must  also  be  filed  without  a  rule 
first  granted  for  that  purpose. (/■) 

.]      Cross  or  concurrent  Writs;    What. — A  cross  or  concurrent 

writ  of  mandamus  is  one  which  is  issued  to  effect  a  particular  object,  a  rule 
or  a  writ  for  the  same  purpose  having  been  previously  granted  to  other 
parties,  (s) 

.]     Motion. — The    motion    for  a  rule  for  a  cross  or   concurrent 

r*QQOT  *writ  may  be  made  at  any  time  after  the  granting  of  the  rule  for 
■-       "-'  the  first  writ.(/) 

.]  .  Rule. — The  rule  for  a  cross  or  concurrent  writ,  is  ob- 
tained upon  motion  to  the  Court  for  that  purpose, («<)  it  is  not  granted  as 
of  course,  but  with  difficulty,  because  the  granting  it  tends  not  only  to 
harass  and  oppress  those  to  whom  it  is  directed,  by  incurring  the  double 
expense  and  trouble  consequent  upon  two  returns,  but  in  some  cases,  as 
of  an  election,  would,  if  the  writ  issued,  cause  a  double  election  ;  if,  how- 
ever, some  special  reason  appear  by  affidavit,  or  there  be  reasonable  cause 
to  suspect  that  he  who  has  obtained  the  rule  for  the  first  writ,  does  not 
really  mean  to,  or  will  improperly  prosecute  it,  the  Court  {v)  will  grant  a 

{p)  R.  V.  Edyvean,  3  T.  R.  352. 

\q)  Crown  Off.  Rules,  r.  11,  App. 

(r)  Crown  Off.  Rules,  r.  14.     See  post,  '■'  Rule  to  return  Writ." 

(s)  R.  V.  Wigan  (Corp.),  Burr.  782.  R.  v.  Scarborough  (Corp.),  Say.  105.  R  v. 
Haslemere  (Corp.),  Say.  106.  R.  x.  Oxford  (Corp.),  Cas.  t.  Hard.  178,  citing  Bo- 
rough of  Evesham's  case  probabh-.  S.  C.  Stra.  949,  but  not  S.  P.  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."(B.) 

(?)  R.  v.  Scarborough  (Corp.),  Say.  105.  R.  v.  Haslemere  (Corp.),  Say.  106  ;  the 
application  for  the  cross  writ  was  in  each  case  made  two  days  after  the  application 
for  the  first. 

(m)  See  ante,  p.  295,  n.  (o). 

(y)  The  Court  will  require  specific  affidavits  of  facts,  and  not  mere  suggestions 
of  suspicion  founded  upon  mere  imagination.  R.  v.  Wigan  (Corp.),  Burr.  782.  S. 
C.  2  Ld.  Ken.  584.  Although  R.  v.  Orcford  (Borough),  B.  R.  M.  1737,  was  a  case 
of  a  concurrent  mandamus  grautcd  without  affidavits,  yet  Ld.  JIansfield,  C.  J., 
Burr.  784,  said,  that  both  that  and  Evesham's  case,  P.  6  Geo.  2,  B.  R.,  were  dis- 
posed of  without  argument  and  opposition,  whereas  R.  a*.  Scarborough  (Corp.),  and 
R.  T.  Haslemere  (Corp.),  supra,  n.  [t],  were  debated  and  fully  considered.     The 


FORM,    ETC.  377 

rule  to  slicw  cause  why  a  mandamus  sliould  not  issue.  If,  however,  a 
party  have  been  sworn  in  by  virtue  of  a  peremptory  mandamus,  the 
Court  will  not  grant  a  rule  for  another  writ,  in  order  to  try  the  legality 
of  his  election,  but  will  leave  the  parties  to  any  other  remedy  they  may 
have.(/r) 

Although  upon  the  discussion  of  the  rule,  any  argument  tending  to  shew 
why  such  cross  or  concurrent  writ  should  not  issue  may  be  urged,  yet 
usually  the  single  question  raised  is,  whether  there  esists  any  reasonable 
cause  to  suspect  that  the  party  who  has  obtained  the  first  writ  docs  not 
really  mean  to  carry  it  into  execution,  and  upon  the  Court  being  satisfied 
upon  tliis  point,  it  will  either  make  the  rule  absolute  or  refuse  it.  The 
rule  will,  in  general  be  discharged  if  the  party  who  obtained  the  first  rule 
will  undertake  pcrcmp/oriYy  to  execute  the  writ  he  has  applied  for.(j')  So 
if  the  application  be  only  quia  timet,  i.  e.,  founded  on  a  mere  suggestion, 
that  the  first  writ  may  be  suppressed,  the  Court  will  refuse  it,  for  the 
Court  will  not  presume  that  any  person  *will  dare  to  suppress  j.-j,goQ-] 
such  a  writ.(y)  So  if  there  be  merely  delay  in  prosecuting  it,  the 
Court  will  not  award  a  second  writ  ;(z)  but  in  such  a  case  the  Court  usually 
orders  a  day  before  which  the  writ  must  be  executed,  to  be  inserted  in  the 
former  mandamus,  and  imposes  such  other  terms  as  are  calculated  to  en- 
sure its  due  execution. (a)  But  where  in  the  case  of  a  writ  to  proceed  to 
an  election,  it  appeared  that  the  time  for  proceeding  to  such  election  had 
passed,  and  that  the  terms  imposed  upon  the  prosecutor,  when  the  rule 
nisi  for  the  cross  or  concurrent  writ  was  refused  had  not  been  complied 
with,  the  Court  awarded  a  concurrent  writ  and  said  that  if  previously  there 
had  been  good  ground  to  suspect  delay,  it  would  then  have  granted  the 
concurrent  writ. (6) 

As  to  rule,  &c.,  see  ante,  p.  295,  303. 

.]     Returns. — The  defendant  must  make  a  return  to  each  writ ; 

he  must  obey  both.(c) 

.]     Costs. — As  to  the  costs  or  concurrent  writs,  see  post,  tit. 

''  Costs." 

.]     Alias  or  Plurics  Writ;  when  granted. — At  common  law,  if  no 

return,  or  an  insufficient  one(r?)  had  been  made  to  the  first  writ,  or  the 
writ  was,  after  the  filing  of  the  return,  when  it  was  too  late  to  amend  it, 
found  to  be  defective,  the  ordinary  practice  was  to  issue  an   alias,  and  if 

same  case  (R.  v.  Wigan  Corp.),  also  discloses  that  the  Master  of  the  Crown  Office, 
during  the  argument,  reported  to  Lord  Mansfield,  that  it  was  not  the  practice  to 
grant  cross  or  concurrent  writs  of  mandamus  of  course  or  without  special  reasons. 
ace  R.  v.  Turner,  2  Jones,  215.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.)  See  ante,  tit.  "Rule" 
(Affidavits),  and  post,  tit.  "  Affidavits." 

{w)  R.  V.  Turner,  Sir  T.Jon.  215. 

{z)  R.  V.  AVigan  (Corp.),  Burr.  784.     S.  C.  2  Ld.  Ken.  584. 

[y)  R.  T.  Scarborough  (Corp.),  Say.  105.     See  supra,  n.  [v). 

(z)  R.  V.  Ilaslemere  (Corp.),  Say.  lOG.     See  supra,  n.  [v). 

(a)  Say.  lOG,  see  supra,  n.  [z).     R.  v.  Plymouth  (Borough),  1  Barn.  130. 

\b)  Say.  106,  supra,  n.  (i'). 

(c)  R.  V.  Harris,  Burr.  1422.     S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  430.     See  post,  tit.  "  Return." 

{d)  R.  T.  Corye,  Sty.  ST. 


378  tapping's    mandamus. 

necessary,  a  plurics  writ,  each  rctarnable  immediately. (r)  In  extraordi- 
nary cases,  however,  the  Court  woiihl,  previously  to  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20, 
and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  where  justice  required  it,  compel  a  return  to  the  first 
or  the  alias  writ,(/)  and  on  default,  would  grant  an  attachment. (^)  How- 
ever, by  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  it  was,  in  the  cases  of  municipal  offices,  wisely 
ordained  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  delay,  that  the  return  should 
peremptorily  be  made  to  the  first  writ,(/t)  which  statute  was,  by  stat.  1 
P^.3o  ( -]  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  extended  to  writs  of  ^mandamus  in  all  cases,  so  that 
an  alias  mandamus  is,  at  this  day,  rarely  met  with  in  practice, 
because  in  cases  of  difficulty,  the  Court,  on  application,  will  grant  further 
time  to  make  the  return. (i)  In  a  late  case,  however,  the  Court  issued  an 
alias  mandamus,  where  the  first  writ  had  been  superseded,  for  not  having 
allowed  sufficient  time  between  the  teste  and  the  return. (J) 

.]     Amendment  of   Writ. — Formerly,   when  the   doctrine  as  to 

amendments  remained  as  at  common  law,  the  Court  would  allow  the  writ 
of  mandamus  to  be  amended  before  return  filed,(7i,-)  but  not  after ;(?)  not- 
withstanding the  proposed  amendment  would  not  have  afi"ected  the  merits 
of  the  question  ;(m)  so  that  if  the  prosecutor  discovered,  after  the  filing 
of  the  return,  that  his  writ  for  any  cause  required  amendment,  he  was 
compelled  to  move  for  a  new  one.  This  practice  also  prevailed  after  the 
passing  of  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  7,  although  thereby  both  the  stat.  4 
Ann.  c.  16,  and  all  the  Statutes  of  Jeofayles,  were  extended  to  writs  of 
mandamus,  (h) 

The  strict  rule  of  the  common  law  has  been,  during  late  years,  alto- 
gether departed  from ;  the  principle  as  to  amendment  which  now  obtains 
beincr,  that  it  shall  be  allowed  in  all  cases  where  such  a  course  would 
promote  justice. (o)  Thus  in  a  late  case,  the  Court  ordered  the  writ  to  be 
amended  during  an  argument,  in  order  that  such  argument  might  proceed 
independently  of  such  objection. Q))     But  if  the  error  in  the  writ  be  not 

(e)  Stra.  87,  supra,  n.  [d).  See  form  of  pluries  writ,  Trem.  PL  Cor.  452.  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (H.) 

(/)  R.  V.  Owen,  Skin.  669.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6.  See  stats.  A  pp.  The 
stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21  (E.),  is  extended  to  Ireland  by  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113. 

{g)  Mayor  of  Coventry's  case,  2  Salk.  429.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  Pal.  455.  S. 
C.  Latcla.  229.     S.  C.  Noy,  92.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  '•  Man."  D.  6. 

{h)  Mayor  of  Coventry's  case,  2  Salk.  429.  Anon.,  2  Salk.  434.  Dr.  Withering- 
ton's  case,  1  Keb.  50.  R.  v.  Raines,  3  Salk.  233  ;  Comb.  238.  See  Thompson  v. 
Edwards,  2  Roll.  Abr.  256,  pi.  4.  Middleton's  case,  2  Dyer,  332  b.  Anon.,  11  Mod. 
265.  Dr.  Patrick's  case,  1  Keb.  294.  298.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12, 
App.     See  ante,  p.  7,  n.  {n),  and  post,  tit.  "  Return." 

[i)  The  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  was  extended  to  Ireland  by  stat.  9  &  10  Tict.  c.  113. 
See  Stats.  App. 

(/)  R.  V.  St.  Andrews  (Parish),  7  A.  &  E.  281.t     S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  395. 

\k)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (B.)  R.  v.  Clitheroe  (Town),  6  Mod.  133.  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "Man."  C.  4.  See  further,  as  to  Amendment,  post,  tit.  "Return"  (Amendment). 

(Z)  R.  V.  Stafford  (Mayor),  4  T.  R.  689.  R.  v.  Clitheroe  (Town),  6  Mod.  133,  n. 
[b).     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (B.) 

(m)  4  T.  R.  689,  supra,  n.  (/). 

\n)  See  stat.  App.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  s.  16,  App. 

(o)  See  post,  tit.  "Return"  (Amendment). 

\p)  R.  V.  Newbury  (Mayor),  1  Q.  B.  75y.f  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  388.  S.  C.  2  Jur. 
812  ;  the  amendment  was  the  insertion  of  an  allegation  of  demand  and  refusal. 


FORM,     ETC.  379 

one  properly  the  subject  of  amendment,  the  Court  may  be  moved  that  it 
be  either  superseded  or  quashed, ((^)  according  to  the  circumstances  of  the 
case. 

The  application  for  leave  to  make  the  amendments,  is  usually  made  by 
motion  to  the  Court,  although  there  are  rare  instances  of  an  amendment 
having  been  made  by  Judge's  order. (r)  The  rule  nisi  should  specially 
state  the  particular  amendments  which  are  proposed. (s)  *If  the  r-^ooK-i 
Court  allow  the  amendments,  it  will,  in  its  discretion,  impose 
terms  upon  the  prosecutor. (/) 

].  Supersedeas. — The  Court  will,  on  a  proper  case  made,  super- 
sede the  writ,  that  is,  restrain  all  further  procedure  upon  it.  The  Court 
is,  however,  anxious  to  sustain  proceedings,  in  order  to  save  expense,  and 
therefore  will  not,  on  the  motion  of  the  defendant,  supersede  a  writ, 
except  for  a  manifest  fault  in  \t.{ii)  Thus,  it  is  no  ground  for  supersed- 
ing a  mandamus  to  grant  administration,  that,  since  the  granting  of  the 
writ,  a  suit  has  been  commenced  in  the  Ecclesiastical  Court  as  to  such 
administration. (r)  If,  however,  the  writ  ought  not  to  have  been  issued, 
i.  e.  improvide  emanavit,  or  is  clearly  irregular,  i.  e.  erronice  emanavit, 
the  Court  will  supersede  it.(w)  Thus,  if  there  be  several  distinct  rights 
joined  in  one  writ,  it  will  be  superseded. (x)  So,  if  the  writ  do  not  fol- 
low the  rule  absolute  upon  which  it  is  founded. (?/)  So,  if  it  be  misdi- 
rected. (2)  So,  if  there  be  not,  agreeably  with  the  rule  of  Court,  the 
requisite  number  of  days  between  the  teste  and  return. (a)  The  Court 
will  also  supersede  the  writ,  although  the  case  be  one  in  which  the  Court 
granted  the  rule  for  the  writ  absolute  in  the  first  instance. (Z*) 

The  Court  will  not,  however,  supersede  the  writ,  on  affidavits  of  a  fact, 

[q)  Horsenail's  case,  M.,  18  Geo.  3  ;  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  191.  See  post,  tits.  "Quash- 
ing Writ,"  "  Supersedeas." 

(r)  R.  V.  Bossiney,  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  192,  193.  See  post,  tit.  "Return"  (Amend- 
ment). 

(s)  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  135,  n.  (/). 

[t)  1  Doug.  136,  supra,  n.  («).     See  post,  tit.  "  Return"  (Amendment). 

(m)  R.  v.  Ipswich,  1  Barn.  407.  Anon.  5  Mod.  375.  R.  v.  Beecher,  8  Mod.  335. 
See  tit.  "Amendment,"  p.  334. 

As  to  quashing  writ,  see  that  tit.  post,  p.  336. 

{v)  See  ante,  p.  278,  n.  (r).  R.  v.  Bettesworth,  2  Barn.  420.  S.  C.  7  Mod.  218. 
S.  C.  Andr.  365.  S.  C.  Stra.  857.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  234,  291,  424.  S.  C.  Fitzg.  125. 
Anon.  5  Mod.  374. 

(«')  R.  V.  Norwich  (Mayor),  Stra.  55.  R.  v.  Clarke,  2  East,  78.  Gray  v.  Tench, 
Comb.  454. 

{x)  R.  V.  Hull  (Mayor),  Stra.  578.  R.  v.  Wildman,  Stra.  893.  See  ante,  p.  324. 
R.  T.  Ipswich  (Bailiffs),  1  Barn.  407.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  B.  See  ante,  tit. 
"  Writ"  (Mandatory  Clause),  and  post,  tit.  "  Quashing  Writ." 

{y)  See  ante,  p.  310,  n.  (w)  R.  v.  Hull  (Mayor,  Stra.  578.  See  ante.  R.  v. 
Wiidman,  Stra.  879,  880.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  405,  406.  See  post,  tit.  "  Quashing  Writ," 
p.  336. 

[z)  See  ante,  p.  318.  R.  v.  Norwich  (Mayor),  Stra.  55,  supra.  R.  v.  Sliarpe, 
Gilb.  255.  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  1  W.  Blac.  52.  S.  C.  1  Wils.  266.  See  post,  tit. 
"  Quashing  Writ,"  p.  336. 

(a)  See  ante,  p.  328,  329.  R.  v.  Dover  (Mayor),  Stra.  407.  R.  v.  St.  Andrews, 
7  A.  &  E.  281.1     S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  395. 

[h)  Ante,  p.  330.  R.  v.  St.  Andrews,  7  A.  &  E.  281.f  R.  v.  Dr.  Whaley,  7  Mod. 
309,  per  Probyn,  J.     S.  C.  Stra.  1139. 


380  tapping's    mandamus. 

in  those  cases  in  \fh\ch.  it  requires  a  return,('')  as  of  the  jurisdiction  of  a 
visitor,  &c. 

.]     .     3Iotwn. — The  rule  for  a  supersedeas  is  obtained  on 

motion  to  the  Court,(f?)  supported  by  affidavits,  if  for  extraneous  matter, 
j.^„op-|  *and  not  apparent  on  the  face  of  the  ■writ;(p)  but  if  for  an  ob- 
'-  jcction  apparent  on  the  record,  the  Court  does  not  require  an  affi- 

davit.(/)     Notice  of  motion  must  be  given. (^) 

The  motion  to  supersede  must  be  made  before  the  return  day  is  out, 
and  not  afterwards,  which  practice  was  settled  temp.  Lord  Raymond. (/<) 
For  the  practice  as  to  shewing  cause,  see  post,  title  Return  (Quash inr/}, 
and  Crown  Office  Piulcs,  r.  2.3,  App. 

].     IluIc  Absolute. — If  the  Court  make  the  rule  absolute,  it  will 

or  not,  in  its  discretion,  impose  terms. (i) 

].      Quashing/  Writ. — As  there  cannot  be  a  demurrer  to  the  writ, 

so  the  Court  will,  if  it  should  not  have  been  granted,  retrieve  the  error 
upon  motion  quia  erronice  emanavit(y)  or  quia  improvide  emanavit;(Z:) 
but  not  when  the  facts  stated  may,  if  true,  be  returned.  (?) 

The  grounds  upon  which  the  Court  will  quash  the  writ  are  those  which 
shew  that  the  writ  should  not  have  issued,  or  that  it  is  so  irregular  that 
it  ought  not  to  be  further  prosecuted,  among  which  are  the  following, 
namely,  where  the  writ  is  not  in  accordance  with  the  rule.(m)  Thus, 
where  a  mandamus  differed  from  its  rule,  not  merely  by  adding  things 
incidental  to  the  object  of  the  writ,  but  by  materially  enlarging  the  terms 
thereof,  the  Court  quashed  the  writ,  notwithstanding  it  might,  upon  the 
same  affidavits,  have  granted  a  rule  as  extensive  in  its  terms  jas^tlre^infor- 
mal  writ,  if  it  had  been  applied  for ;  the  Court  also  refused,  on  such  a 
motion,  to  amend  the  rule,  as  a  rule  for  that  purpose  should  have  been 
obtained  before  the  writ  issued. («)     So  the  Court  will  quash  the  writ 

(c)  Ante,  p.  2/3,  274,  n.  (e).  R.  v.  Whalej,  1  Mod.  308.  S.  C.  Stra.  1139.  R. 
T.  Wallingford  (J.),  W.  Kel.  209.  R.  v.  Tregony  (Mayor),  8  Mod.  128.  See  ante 
tit.  "  Visitor." 

(d)  R.  T.  Norwich  (Mayor),  Stra.  55.     R.  v.  Hull  (Mayor),  Stra.  578. 

(e)  Stra.  55,  supra;  7  A.  &  E.  282.t  But  see  Sel.  N.  P.  1037,  11th  edit.,  citing 
R.  T.  Dr.  Whaley,  E.  13  Geo.  2,  34,  MS.  Serjt.  Hill,  p.  325,  where  it  is  said,  the 
Court  will  not  supersede  the  writ  on  an  affidavit  of  the  fact,  it  must  appear  by 
matter  of  record  which  the  party  may  contest. 

(/)  Stra.  578,  supra,  n.  (d).  {g)  Anon.  1  Wils.  30. 

(h)  Anon.,  2  Barn.  326,  per  Lee,  C.  S.,  in  Whitwood  v.  Jocam,  B.  R.  M.  7  Geo. 
2.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  B. 

(?)  Ante,  p.  335,  n.  [t).     R.  v.  Norwich  (Mayor),  Stra.  55. 

ij)  Ante,  p.  335,  n.  (w).  R.  v.  Heathcote,  10  Mod.  59.  R.  v.  Willingford  (J.), 
2  Barn.  132.  And  see  Re  Long,  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  146,  Q.  B.,  in  which  a  peremptory 
writ  which  issued  in  the  first  instance  was  quashed.  See  ante,  tit.  "  Supersedeas," 
and  post,  "Return"  (Quashing). 

(Jc)  R.  V.  Wix  (Inhabs.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  203.t  R.  v.  Tucker,  3  B.  &  C.  544,  547.  S. 
C.  5  D.  &  R.  434.1     R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Skin.  359. 

(/)  Ante,  p.  273,  274,  n.  (e),  335,  n.  (c).  R.  t.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  73  [a).  See 
tit.  "  Visitor." 

[m)  Ante,  p.  310.  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  11  A.  &  E.  27,t  n.  (a),  28.  R.  v.  EastLan- 
cash.  Railway,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  127,  Q.  B.     See  ante,  tit.  "  Supersedeas." 

(«)  Ante,  p.  310.  R.  v.  Water  Eaton  (Manor),  2  Smith,  54.  R.  t.  Tucker,  5  D. 
&  R.  434.t     S.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  545.t 


FORM,     ETC.  381 

where  it  is  misdirected. (o)  So  where  it  has  the  defect  of  multifarious- 
ness, *by  reason  of  joining  the  claims  or  rights  of  several  per-  r*qq7-i 
sons.(j;)  So  if  the  writ  be  for  any  cause  insujfficicnt,  as  if  it  do 
not  shew  upon  the  fiice  of  it  that  the  applicant  is  entitled  to  the  relief 
prayed  ;(j)  or  where  the  writ  does  not  state  those  facts  which  constitute 
^the  breach  of  duty.(r)  So  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Court  to  quash  it,  where 
^  it  commands  the  defendant  to  do  that  which  by  law  he  has  no  power  to 
,  do.(.s)  So  if  it  command  an  illegality. («;)  So  where  awarded  for  pur- 
poses partly  legal  and  partly  not,  as  where  a  mandamus  exceeds  the  obli- 
gation, &c.  imposed  on  the  defendant  by  an  act  of  Parliament,  &c.,  the 
Court  will  not  in  part  enforce  it  by  a  peremptory  mandamus  limiting  its 
effect,  but  will  quash  it,  for  though  the  Court  will,  for  the  purposes  of 
justice,  mould  the  rule  for  the  writ,  yet  it  cannot  mould  the  writ  itself.(«) 
So  the  Court  will  quash  the  writ  if  it  be  not  the  appropriate  remedy. (^•) 
So  the  Court  has  quashed  a  writ  for  absurdity.  Thus  a  mandamus 
directed  to  a  mayor,  &c.,  which  stated  that  A.  and  B.  had  removed  the 
party  complaining  from  his  office  of  burgess,  and  commanded  by  its  man- 
datory clause  the  mayor,  &e.,  to  command  A.  and  B.  to  restore  him,  was 
quashed  for  the  absurdity  of  being  directed  to  one  person  to  command 
another.(»')  So  the  writ  will  be  quashed  in  all  cases  where  it  shews  that 
the  writ  is  felo  de  se,  as  by  shewing  that  there  is  a  visitor  who  has 
jurisdiction,  &,e.{x) 

The  Court  will  also  quash  the  writ  if  it  be  defective  for  uncertainty.(^) 
or  if  there  be  not  the  requisite  period  of  time  between  the  *teste  p^ooQ-i 
and  the  return, (,v)  but  the  Court  will  not  quash  for  these  causes 
after  the  return  day  has  elapsed. (a) 

(o)  See  ante,  p.  319.  Anon.,  2  Salk.  525,  5.  R.  v.  Hereford  (Mayor),  2  Ralk. 
701,  6.  R.  V.  Chester  (Mayor),  3  Salk.  229,  5.  S.  P.  2  Salk.  433.  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"  Man."  B.    See  ante,  tit.  "  Snpersedeas,"  p.  335,  336. 

[p)  Ante,  p.  324.  The  Case  of  Andover,  2  Salk.  433,  13.  Anon.,  2  Salk.  436, 
19.  R.  V.  Chester  (Mayor),  3  Salk.  229,  5.  S.  C.  5  Mod.  10,  11.  S.  C.  Comb.  30 1, 
108.  Hereford's  case,  1  Sid.  209.  White's  case,  6  Mod.  18.  R.  v.  Hull  (.Mayor), 
Stra.  578.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (B).  See  ante,  tit.  "Supersedeas,"  p.  "335, 
336. 

(q)  See  ante,  p.  320.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Ep.),  7  East,  345,  600.  R.  v.  West  Riding, 
(J.),  7  T.  R.  52.  R.  V.  Owen,  5  Mod.  315.  R.  y.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Mod.  241,  notis. 
S.  C.  Skin.  549.     S.  C.  Comb.  282.    Anon.,  2  Salk.  525,  5,  and  cases  there  cited. 

(r)  See  ante,  p.  322.    R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  3  A.  &  E.  539.f     S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222.f 

(«)  See  ante,  p.  15—17.    R.  v.  Tucker,  3  B.  &  C.  547.1     S.  C.  5  D.  &  R.  434.1 

(\)  Ante,  p.  15,  16.  Tawney's  case,  2  Salk.  531,  17.  S.  C.  6  Mod.  97.  S.  C.  3 
Salk.  232.      R.  v.  Sparrow,  Stra.  1123. 

(ii)  Ante,  p.  16,  n.  (??,),  327.  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  3  A.  &  E.  535.f  S.  C.  5  K  &  M. 
222. f  R.  V.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  562.f  R.  v.  Thames  Commis- 
sioners, 5  A.  &  E.  815. f 

[v)  See  ante,  p.  18—27.  Anon.,  2  Salk.  525,  5.  Tawney's  case,  2  Salk.  531, 
17.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1009.     S.  C.  0  Mod.  98.     See  ante,  p.  323. 

(w)  See  ante,  p.  IG,  n.  (k),  314.  R.  v.  Derby  (xMayor),  2  Salk.  436,  18.  See  post, 
tits.  "  Supersedeas"  (Quashing). 

(x)  See  ante,  p.  328.  R.  v.l)r.  Walker,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  212.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 
B.     See  ante,  tit.  "  Visitor." 

(y)  Ante,  p.  309.  R.  v.  Willingford  (.L),  2  Barn.  132.  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Comb. 
279. 

(z)  See  ante,  p.  329,  n.  (z).     See  ante,  tit.  "  Supersedeas." 

{a)  R.  V.  AVitchurch,  2  Barn.  447. 


382  tapping's    mandamus. 

As  to  allowing  an  amendment   on  motion   to  quash,  sec  ante,   title 
Amendment. 

.]     Jhtion,    When    made,   d"c. — Of  the  motion  to  (juash  notice 

must  be  given  to  the  opposite  party,  or  the  Court  will  not  entertain 
it.(h) 

Formerly,  if  the  writ  of  mandamus  were  any  way  objectionable,  an  ap- 
plication to  quash  must  have  been  made  before  return  filed,  for  after  that 
step  taken  the  objection  was  considered  as  waived  ;(c)  but  this  doctrine,  at 
all  events,  as  to  matters  of  substance,  is  now  overruled,(f/)  the  Court  hav- 
ing in  numerous  cases  permitted  such  an  objection  to  prevail  where  a  re- 
turn has  been  argued  ;(c)  and  in  one  case,(/)  after  a  return  had  been  held 
to  be  bad,  exceptions  were  allowed  to  be  taken  to  the  writ  in  a  subsequent 
Term.(y).  The  rule  of  law  which  now  obtains  upon  this  point  is,  that 
where  a  return  is  set  down  for  argument  on  a  concilium  or  demurrer,  the 
defendant  may  take  objections  to  the  writ  in  matters  of  substance, (7t)  for 
on  a  concilium  the  ichole  record  is  set  down  for  argument,  and  the  defend- 
ant has  a  right  to  object  to  the  writ  of  mandamus  in  matters  of  substance 
as  much  as  a  defendant  has  a  right  to  object  to  a  declaration  where  the 
whole  record  is  set  out  upon  ^demurrer  or  writ  of  error  after  plea 
^  in  civil  proceedings.     Also  in  the  case  of  an  indictment  to  which 

there  has  been  special  pleas,  the  defendant  has  a  right  to  object  to  the  in- 
dictment,(/')  for  quod  initio  vitiosum  est,  uon  potest  tractu  temporis  con- 
valescere.(ji') 

After  a  return  has  been  made,  and  issue  thereon  tried,  the  Court  will 
not  quash  the  writ  on  grounds  which  were  or  might  have  been  discussed 

(b)  See  ante,  p.  336.     Anon.,  1  Wils.  30. 

As  to  the  practice  of  quashing  the  writ,  see  post,  tits.  "  Quashing  the  Return," 
"  Demurrer,"  &c. 

(c)  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  66,  74.  But  see  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  B.,  where 
it  is  stated,  "  that  the  motion  to  quash  cannot  be  made  before  rerurn  made  and 
filed."  Before  the  filing  of  the  return  the  practice  was,  and  perhaps  is,  to  super- 
sede the  writ.     See  tit.  "  Supersedeas,"  p.  335,  336. 

{d)  R.  V.  Newbury  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  388.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  TSl.f  R.  v.  Kendall, 
4  P.  &  D.  619.     S.  (3.  1  Q.  B.  366.t     See  post,  tit.  "Return"  (Quashing). 

(e)  R.  V.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  732.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  616.t  R.  v.  Margate  Pier, 
3  B.  &  A.  220.t  R.  V.  Powell,  1  Q.  B.  352.  S.  0.  4  P.  &  D.  719.  S.  C.  nom.  R. 
T.  Richmond  (Steward),  5  Jur.  605.  Taylor  v.  Gloucester  (City),  1  Roll.  409.  R. 
V.  Chester  (City),  5  Mod.  10.  R.  v.  Shepton  Mallett,  5  Mod.  420.  R.  v.  Abingdon, 
2  Salk.  699.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  559.  S.  C.  Garth.  499.  R.  t.  Littleport  (Parish),  6 
Mod.  97.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  531,  17.  R.  v.  Tregony  (Mayor),  8  Mod.  Ill,  112.  R.  r. 
Ward  (Dr.),  Stra.  893.  Moore  v.  Hastings  (.Mayor),  Cas.  t.  Hard.  353,  362.  R.  v. 
Physicians'  Coll.,  Burr.  1740,  2742.  R.  v.  Bristol  Dock,  6  B.  &  C.  189.t  S.  C.  9 
D.  &  R.  309.t     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.) 

(/)  R.  T.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  Carth.  499.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  699.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym. 
559.     S.  C.  12  Mod.  308.     S.  C.  Holt,  441.     See  post,  tit.  "  Return"  (Quashing). 

(g)  R.  v.  Margate  Pier,  3  B.  &  A.  222.     See  post,  tit.  "  Return"  (Quashing). 

(h)  R.  V.  Powell,  4  P.  &  D.  719.  S.  0.  1  Q.  B.  360.t  R.  v.  Willingford  (J.),  2 
Batn.  132.  R.  v.  Bangor  (Overseers),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  58,  M.  C.  See  post. tit.  "Re- 
turn" (Demurrer  to  Return). 

(?)  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  73.  See  R.  r.  West  Riding  (J.),  7  T.  R.  52.  R. 
v.  St.  Pancras,  3  A.  &  E.  539.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222.t  Clarke  v.  Leicestersh. 
Canal,  6  Q.  B.  898.f  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  B.  R.  v.  Physicians' (Coll.),  Burr. 
2740.     See  further  as  to  invalidating  the  writ,  post,  tit.  "  Return"  (Demurrer). 

(y)  D.  50,  t.  17,  f.  29. 


RETURN,     ETC. 


888 


on  shewing  cause  against  the  application  for  it,  as  that  a  suggestion  on 
which  the  motion  for  the  writ  was  made  is  untrue. (/o)  So  after  return 
made,  and  issue  in  fact  tried,  the  Court  will  not  although  the  writ  be  ma- 
terially defective  in  form,  quash  it  on  motion. (/) 

.]      Costs. — When  the  writ  is  quashed  for  a  substantial  defect,  the 

Court  in  its  discretion  will  award  costs  to  the  defendant.  Thus  where  on 
a  concilium  on  a  return  to  a  writ  of  mandamus,  which  commanded  the 
defendants  to  seal  a  bond  to  the  prosecutor  for  the  amount  of  compensa- 
tion awarded  to  him  by  the  Lords  of  the  Treasury,  under  stat.  5  &  G  Wm. 
4,  c.  76,  s,  66,  on  the  abolition  of  an  office,  the  Court  held  the  writ  to  be 
bad,  because  it  appeared  on  the  face  of  it  that  the  Lords  had  no  jurisdic- 
tion, and  that  as  the  defendants  had  disputed  not  only  the  amount  of  com- 
pensation, but  also  the  right  to  any  compensation,  they  ought  to  have  the 
costs  of  the  writ,  and  stated  that  it  was  so  much  a  matter  of  cause  that 
costs  should  attend  the  event,  that  such  rule  ought  not  to  be  interfered 
with  unless  under  special  circumstances,  fm) 


^CHAPTER  THE  SIXTH. 


[*340] 


OF   THE   RETURN,  ITS  FORM,  SUBSTANCE,  &C.,  AND  OF   THOSE    FORMULAE 
WHEREBY   IT,    WHEN    DEFECTIVE,    MAY    BE   INVALIDATED. 

The  subject  of  this  Chapter,  the  Return,  is  that  formula  whereby  the 
defendant  answers  the  prosecutor's  writ,  and  states  to  the  Court  of  B.  R. 
either  that  he  has  performed  the  command  of  such  writ,  or  a  legal  excuse 
or  justification  for  his  non-performance  thereof,  or  that  the  prosecutor  is 
not  entitled  to  that  which  he  seeks  by  his  writ. (a) 

Return.  Return 

By  whom  made 

Persons      -         -         - 
Corporations 

In  cases  within  1  Win.  4, 
21  (E.),and9  &  10  Vict. 
113(1.)        _      -         - 
Application 
Of  returns  by  several  Copora- 

tions,  Officers,  &c. 
When  to  be  made  - 
How  enforced 

Rule  to  return  writ 
The  return    -         -         - 
When  necessary 
The  species  of  return 
1st.  Traverse 

(^)R.  V.  Stamford  (Mayor),  6  Q.  B.  433. f 

il)  Ante,  p.  309,  310,  and  see  n.  (k),  supra. 

(m)  R.  V.  Newbury  (Mayor),  2  G.  &  D.  109.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  751.t  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D. 
388.  S.  C.  2  Jur.  812.  S.  C.  6  Jur.  821.  See  generally  as  to  costs,  post,  tit. 
"  Costs,"  and  ante,  tit.  "  Compensation"  (Office,  Assessing). 

(a)  A  return  has  been  likened  to  a  declaration  ;  3  B.  &  Ad.  278  ;f  ante,  p.  309, 
n.  (c). 


-  340 

Form 

-  348 

-  340 

Substance 

-     ,    -  349 

-  341 

2nd.    Special   in  Confession 

e. 

and  Avoidance 

-  351 

c. 

Form 

-  351 

-  342 

Substance 

-  358 

-  343 

Double  or  several  returns    360 

i- 

3rd.  Return  in  the  nature  of  a 

-  343 

demurrer     - 

-  362 

-  344 

Engrossing  return 

-  363 

-  344 

Signing  and  sealing 

-  363 

-  344 

Swearing  return     - 

-  364 

-  346 

Filing  return 

-  365 

-  346 

Necessity  of   - 

-  365 

-  347 

When  to  be  filed 

-  365 

-  348 

How  filed 

-  366 

384                       tapping's    mandamus. 

Retukn. 

Reti'r.v. 

Staying;  fiUnci; 

. 

-  3G6 

Rule  nisi 

- 

-  374 

Taking  oil'  the  file 

- 

-  367 

Shewing  cause 

- 

-  374 

"Witlulniwiiig  returu 

- 

-  3G7 

Rule  absolute 

- 

-  375 

Disavowin;^  return 

- 

-  3G7 

Demurrer  to 

- 

-  375 

Amendment  of  return 

- 

-  308 

Rejoinder  in  Demurrer 

-  377 

Invalidiithig  return 

- 

-  309 

Paper  bool^s 

- 

-  378 

Quashing    - 

- 

-  372 

Argument 

- 

-  379 

Application     - 

- 

-  374 

Judgment 

- 

-  380 

Affidavits 

- 

-  374 

Costs 

- 

-  380 

The  Return.]  B^  vhom  made;  Persons. — The  return  to  the  writ 
should  be  made  either  by  those  to  whom  such  writ  is  (lirected,(6)  or  who 
*are  legally  competent  to  execute  it,(c)  either  by  virtue  of  stat.  1 
L  -I  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4,  or  otherwise. (r?)  Thus,  where  a  writ  was 
directed  to  bailiffs,  &c.,  being  the  governing  body,  to  swear  in  other  bailiffs, 
which  writ  was  served  upon  the  defendants,  who  by  af&davits  on  motion 
alleged  that  they  had  sworn  in  others  to  the  office,  it  was  held  that  defend- 
ants should  make  return  ;  for  if  the  bailiffs  they  had  sworn  in  should  not 
have  been  duly  elected,  they,  the  defendants,  would  still  continue 
bailiffs, (e)  and  therefore  legally  competent  to  execute  the  writ.  But  where 
a  writ  was  directed  to  bailiffs  and  constables,  and  the  return  was  by  the 
deputy  constable,  it  was  held  ill,  because  the  return  was  not  made  by 
those  to  whom  the  writ  was  directed. C/)  So  also  where  the  writ  was 
directed  to  "  the  aldermen,  bailiffs,  and  commonalty,"  and  the  return  was 
by  the  bailiffs  and  capital  burgesses  without  the  commonalty,  the  return, 
for  the  same  reason,  was  held  to  be  bad.(.y)  So  where  the  writ  directed 
to  "  the  mayor,  aldermen,  common  council,  and  chamberlain  of  a  city," 
was  returned  by  the  ma3'or  and  commonalty,  the  return  was  quashed,  be- 
cause those  to  Avhomit  was  directed  had  not  returned  it.(/i)  But  a  return 
by  "  the  mayor,  alderman,  and  common  council,"  to  a  mandamus  directed 
"  to  the  mayor  and  aldermen  of,  &c."  is  good  for  a  return  by  a  right  name 
to  a  writ  directed  by  a  wrong  name  is  good.(/) 

.]      Corporations. — Where  a  corporation  aggregate,  to  which  a 

mandamus  is  directed,  has  regularly  resolved  upon  and  made  a  return, 
individual  dissentients  cannot  be  allowed  to  dispute  its  propriety ;(_;)  so 


{b)  Prin's  case,  1  Keb.  540,  per  Keeling,  C.  J.  R.  v.  S.  John's  Coll.,  .Skin.  363. 
R.  V.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  67.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  1  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (I.) 
Ante,  p.  310,  n.  (/) 

(c)  R.  V.  Dolgelly  Union,  8  A.  &  E.  564.-(-  S.  C.  3  X.  k  P.  542.  R.  v.  Patrick,  2 
Keb.  G7.    See  ante,  p.  313,  n.  {iv). 

(d)  See  Stat.  App.,  and  as  to  Ireland,  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 

(e)  R.  V.  Clitlioroe  (Town),  C  mod.  133.  R.  v.  Hoskins,  Cas.  t.  Hark.  188.  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  '•  Man."  D.  1. 

(/)  R.  v.  the  Baily,  &c.,  1  Keb.  33.  Catchin  v.  Wargar,  B.  R.  23  Car.  1,  Rot.  241. 
there  cited. 

Ig)  1  Keb.  34,  supra,  n.  (/). 

(/*(  Harcourt  v.  Fo.x,  Comb.  213  ;  the  proper  motion  in  such  case  is,  to  move  that 
the  person  to  whom  the  writ  is  directed  shall  return  it. 

[i)  Ante,  p.  318,  n.  (y).  R.  v.  Mills,  1  Keb.  623.  See  ante,  "Writ"  (Direction), 
p.  318,  319. 

{j)  R.  V.  St.  Andrews  (Parish),  7  A.  &  E.  284.t     S.  C.  W.  W.  k  D.  395. 


RETURN,     ETC.  385 

that  if  two  separate  returns  be  made  by  different  portions  of  tbe  same  cor- 
poration, the  Court  will  take  that  whieh  appears  to  be  made  by  the 
majority.  (/.•) 

A  return  by  a  municipal  corporation  cannot  be  made  by  a  majority 
thereof  without  the  concurrence  of  the  mayor,  whose  consent  makes  the 
majority ;(/)  but  if  a  majority  without  such  concurrence  make  a  return 
*in  the  name  of  the  mayor,  yet  it  shall  be  taken  to  be  his  return  r^q^r)-! 
if  he  do  not  duly  disavow  it.(m) 

As  the  return  of  such  a  corporation  should  be  made  by  the  majority 
thereof,  so  it  should  not  be  made  by  the  mayor  alone  without  the  sanc- 
tion of  such  majority ;(«)  yet  a  return  to  a  writ,  directed  to  a  municipal 
corporation,  whether  or  not  it  be  in  fact  the  return  of  a  majority,  and 
notwithstanding  it  may,  upon  its  face,  appear  to  be  made  by  the  mayor 
alone,  is  sufficient,  and  the  majority,  if  made  without  their  consent,  can- 
not disavow  it,  although  the  mayor,  in  such  a  case,  is  liable  to  be  punished 
by  criminal  information  and  attachment;  for  as  of  a  municipal  corpora- 
tion the  mayor  is  the  principal  and  proper  person  to  bring  in  the  writ,  so 
the  Court  will  receive  it  of  him,  and  will  not  examine  upon  affidavits, 
whether  or  not  there  may  have  been  the  consent  of  a  majority,  the  act  of 
the  mayor  being,  as  before  stated,  the  act  of  the  majority. (o)  But,  as 
before  stated,  if  the  mayor,  in  making  such  return,  whether  good  or  not 
in  law,  or  true  or  false  as  to  the  matter  of  fact,  falsely  allege  that  it  is  the 
return  of  others  also,  it  is  a  contempt  for  which  an  attachment  will  be 
granted,  (p) 

If  the  writ  be  not  returned,  because  the  mayor  and  others  to  whom  it 
is  directed  are  of  different  opinions,  the  Court,  instead  of  granting  an 
attachment,  will  by  consent  direct  the  truth  of  the  disputed  point  to  be 
tried  on  a  feigned  issue. (f/) 

.]     .     Ill  Cases  within  Stats.  1  ^Ym.  4,  c.  21  {E.),  and  9  & 

10  Vict.  c.  113  (/.) — In  cases  within  the  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4 
(E. ),(/•)  (which  embraces  matters  having  relation  to  all  offices,  franchises, 

(k)  Glide's  Cr.  Pr.  191.     See  infra,  tit.  "  Returns  by  Several,"  &c. 

\l)  See  post,  p.  342,  n.  (o)  E.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  12  Mod.  308,  and  cases 
there  cited.     R.  v.  Tlie  Baily,  &c.,  1  Keb.  34.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (H.) 

(?«)  R.  V.  Chapman,  6  Mod.  152.  R.  v.  Monday,  Cowp.  538.  R.  v.  Abingdon 
(Mayor),  2  Sulk.  431 ;  and  see  2  Salk.  701.     See  post,  tit.  "Disavowing  return." 

{n)  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  12  Mod.  308.  R.  v.  The  Baily,  &c.,  1  Keb.  34. 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (H.) 

(o)  Ante,  p.  341,  n.  [1).  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  431,  432.  S.  C.  Carth. 
500.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  308.  S.  C.  Holt,  440.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  559.  Prin's  case,  1 
Keb.  540,  per  Kneeling,  C.  J.  Powell  v.  Price,  Comb.  41.  R.  v.  Shrewsbnry 
(Mayor),  7  Mod.  203.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  1.  R.  v.  Hoskins,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  188. 
R.  v.  Clitheroe  (Town),  G  Mod.  133.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (F.),  (G.)  See  post, 
p.  343,  n.  (y). 

(j9)  R.  V.  Hoskins,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  188.  R.  v.  Clitheroe  (Town),  6  Mod.  133.  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  G.     See  supra,  n.  (o).     See  post,  tit.  "Attachment." 

[q)  R.  V.  Rye  (Jurates),  Burr.  798,  and  cases  there  cited.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man." 
D.  6.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (11.)  n.     See  post,  tit.  "  Feigned  Issue." 

(r)  See  stat.  App.,  and  see  as  to  Ireland  stat.  9  k  10  Vict.  c.  113  (T.),  which, 
as  to  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12  ^L),  contains  a  clause  similar  to  that  of  stat.  1  Wm.  4, 
c.  21.     See  ante,  p.  313,  n.  \t). 

June,  1852.— 25 


386  tapping's    mandamus. 

&c.,  othci'  than  such  as  arc  mentioned  in  or  provided  for  by  tlie  9  Ann.  c. 
20  (K),)  the  return  is  thereby  directed  to  be  made  in  the  name  of  the 
person  to  whuia  the  writ  is  directed,  but  that  if  the  Court  so  direct,  the 
*rcturu  sliall  and  may  be  expressed  to  be  made  on  behalf  of  such 
L  '^^  other  person  as  may  be  mentioned  in  the  rules,  and  in  that  case 
such  other  person  shall  be  permitted  to  frame  the  return,  and  to  conduct 
the  subsequent  proceedings  at  his  own  expense.  As  the  words  of  the 
above  section  give  the  Court  a  discretion  as  to  admitting  an  interested 
party  to  join  in  making  a  return,  so  it  will  not  in  the  due  exercise  of  that 
discretion,  permit  such  third  party  so  to  join  where  his  conduct  does  not 
appear  to  be  bona  fide.(A). 

.]    Aj^plication,  &c. — The  Court  has  held  that  even  after  a  demurrer 

to  a  return  has  been  made  by  the  party  to  whom  the  writ  is  directed,  and 
writ  of  error  brought,  it  will,  on  a  proper  case  let  in  the  party  really  inte- 
rested to  make  the  return. (;) 

The  permission  to  join  in  making  the  return  is  obtained  by  motion  to 
the  Court  for  a  rule,  calling  upon  the  prosecutors  of  the  writ,  and  those  to 
whom  the  writ  is  directed,  to  shew  cause  why  the  return  to  the  said  writ 
should  not  be  made  and  joined  in  the  names  of  those  to  whom  the  writ  is 
directed,  but  expressed  to  be  made  and  joined  on  behalf  of  the  applicant, 
and  why  the  said  applicant  should  not  be  at  liberty  to  frame  such  return 
and  conduct  the  subsequent  proceedings  thei-eon  at  his  own  expense. («) 
In  support  of  such  application,  there  should  be  affidavits  shewing  the 
merits  upon  which  compliance  with  the  writ  is  withheld,  and  containing, 
in  analogy  with  an  application  under  the  Interpleader  Act,(t)  an  allega- 
tion that  such  merits  are  insisted  on  bona  fide.(?f) 

.]     Returns   hy  several    Corporations,    Officers,    &c. — As    before 

stated,  where  a  corporation  aggregate,  to  which  a  mandamus  is  directed, 
has  regularly  resolved  upon  and  made  a  return,  individual  dissentients  can- 
not be  allowed  to  dispute  its  propriety  ;(.r)  and  that  where  separate  returns 
are  made  by  different  portions  of  the  same  corporation,  the  Court  will  take 
that  which  is  or  appears  to  be  made  by  the  majority. (y)  If,  however,  the 
writ  be  directed  to  several  independent  corporate  bodies,  officers,  or  persons, 
although  they  may  not  have  separate  or  distinct  legal  capacities,  yet  each 
may  make  a  separate  return, (.r)  or  a  joint  one,  and  either  upon  the  original 
r*QJ.n  ^"^  °^  *^^  copies  with  which  they  *have  been  served. (o)  If,  how- 
ever,  as  before  stated  in  the  case  of  a  mayor,  one  make  a  return  in 

(s)  R.  V.  Cheek,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  6.5,  M.  C. 

{t)  R.  V.  Payater,  7  Q.  B.  255.f  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  X.  S.  182,  Q.  B.,  per  Patte- 
son,  J. 

(»)  R.  V.  Cheek,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  05,  M.  C.  As  to  motion,  &c.,  see  ante,  p.  295, 
297. 

(v)  See  Stat.  1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  58,  App.,  and  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113  (I.) 

\w)  R.  V.  Cheek,  16  L.  J.,  X.  S.  65,  M.  C.    See  stat.  1  <fc  2  Wna.  4,  c.  58,  App. 

{x)  Ante,  p.  341,  n.  (/).     R.  v.  St.  Andrew  (Parish),  7  A.  &  E.  284.f 

[y)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  191.     Supra,  p.  341. 

(z)  R.  r.  The  Baily,  &c.,  1  Keb.  34.  R.  v.  St.  Saviour's  Parish,  7  A.  k  E.  925.f 
S.  C.  3  X.  &  P.  126.     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  496,1  (where  see  several  returns). 

(a)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  184,  ante,  p.  330. 


RETURN,     ETC.  387 

the  name  of  another  without  his  priority  and  consent,  and  action  on  the 
case  lies  against  him,  and  such  an  act  is  an  oifcnce  for  which  the  Court 
will  grant  a  criminal  information  and  attachment. (&) 

,]     When  Return  to  he  made. — By  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  l,(f), 

it  is  enacted  that  a  return  to  a  mandamus  for  admitting  or  restoring 
to  any  office  or  freedom  in  a  municipal  corporation  shall  be  made  on  or 
before  the  return  day  of  the  first  writ  j(c)  and  if  default  be  made,  the 
Court  of  B.  E.  will,  on  affidavit  of  service  of  the  writ,  grant  a  peremptory 
mandamus,  and  after  that  an  attachmcnt,(<:/)  the  provisions  of  which  stat- 
ute have,  by  the  subsequent  act  of  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21, (c)  been  extended  to 
writs  of  mandamus  in  all  other  cases.  The  Court  will,  however,  on  motion 
supported  by  the  necessary  affidavits,  grant  further  time  within  which  to 
make  the  return. (/)  Before  the  expiration  of  the  original  time,  if  no 
further  time  have  been  granted  by  the  Court,  the  defendant  must  duly  file 
his  return  at  the  Crown  office,  according  to  the  exigency  of  the  first  writ, 
that  is,  on  or  before  the  return  day  therein  mentioned,  and  without  a  rule 
for  that  purpose,(r/)  under  pain  of  an  attachment,  but  the  Court  will  not 
compel  the  defendant  to  return  or  plead  before  his  time  shall  expire,  in 
order  to  give  the  prosecutor  an  opportunity  to  move  for  a  trial  at  Bar,(7() 
or  for  any  other  purpose.(i) 

.]     IIoio  enforced  ;  Rule  to  return  Writ. — It  has  been  stated, (7) 

that  it  is  the  duty  of  that  defendant  upon  whom  the  writ  of  mandamus 
has  been  personally  served,  to  return  and  file  it  with  his  return,  on  or 
*before  the  return  day  in  such  writ  mentioned,  or  before  the  expi-  r*345-| 
ration  of  any  further  time,  the  Court  may,  on  application  for  that 
purpose  have  allowed  him;  if,  therefore,  the  defendant  altogether  neg- 
lect his  duty  in  this  respect,  the  practice  has  always  been,  for  the  prosecu- 
tor, in  those  cases  in  which  he  is  unprepared  with  an  affidavit  of  service 

(h)  Ante,  p.  342,  n.  (p).  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.  Skin.  368.  Abingdon  Town's 
case.  Garth.  500.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  559.  R.  v.  Gloucester  (Mayor),  2  Show.  504. 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (G.) 

(c)  See  ante,  p.  7,  n.  (m),  and  stats.  App.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  2,  D.  6.  And 
see  also  stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  s.  6.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (H.) 

As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  s.  1,  16,  App.,  also  citing  11  Geo.  2,  c. 
4,  s.  1,  by  which  it  is  also  enacted,  that  the  return  must  be  made  to  the  first 
writ. 

(d)  Mayor  of  Coventry's  case,  2  Salk.  429.     See  post'  tit.  "  Peremptory  Writ." 

(e)  Ante,  p.  1.     See  App.,  and  as  to  Ireland,  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 

(/)  R.  V.  Owen,  Stra.  669.  R.  v.  Fowey  (Mayor),  5  D.  &  R.  OU.f  S.  C.  2  B.  & 
C.  591.t  Canterbury  (Archbp.)  v.  Trin.  Coll.,  1  Barn.  194;  1  H.  &  W.  370.  See 
stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  6,  App. 

As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  s.  6,  App. 

(ff)  Ante,  p.  6;  Bull.  N.  P.  198,  199.  Justice  v.  Jones,  1  Barn.  291.  S.  C.  Stra. 
857.  R.  V.  Fowey  (Mayor),  5  D.  &  R.  eu.f  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  2.  Formerly 
when  a  return  was  not  made  in  time,  it  was  necessary  to  obtain  a  side  bar  rule 
naming  a  further  time,  or  an  attachment  would  be  denied.  R.  v.  Esham  (Mayor), 
2  Barn.  265. 

(/()  Anon.,  2  Barn.  106. 

(\-)  R.  V.  St.  Andrew's  (Parish),  7  A.  &  E.  281.t     S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  395. 

(/)  Ante,  p.  6,  n.  (0),  (p),  328,  n.  (t-),  331,  n.  {m),  (7). 


388  tapping's    mandamus. 

of  the  writ,  to  obtain  a  side  bar  rule,  (which  is  not  peremptory);  to  "  Re- 
turn the  Writ."(/.) 

Prior  to  the  passing  of  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  the  rule  to  "  return  the 
writ"  was  not  usually  granted  in  any  case  of  mandamus,  until  an  alias 
and  pluries  writ  had  first  been  severally  issued,  although  the  Court  had 
power  to  grant  it  sooner  ;  but  as  that  statute  restrained  the  Court  from 
exercising  this  indulgence  of  alias  and  pluries  writs  in  respect  of  annual 
offices  of  municipal  corporations  only,  by  compelling  a  return  to  the  first 
writ  of  mandamus,  so  the  practice  as  to  all  other  cases,  except  those  pro- 
vided for  by  such  statute,  remained  as  at  common  law.  The  granting  of 
the  alias  and  pluries  writs  having,  on  account  of  the  delay  thereby  occa- 
sioned, been  much  complained  of,  and  as  such  act  of  9  Ann.  c.  20,  had 
pointed  out  a  direction  in  one  class  of  cases,  so  the  Court  made  it  the  rule 
of  their  practice  in  all ;  accordingly,  it  has,  since  the  above  statute,  been 
the  constant  course  to  grant  a  rule  for  a  return  to  the  first  mandamus  in 
all  cases ;(/)  and  recently,  by  the  Crown  Office  Rules,  r.  13,  it  is  ordered, 
that  a  side  bar  "  rule  to  return  a  writ"  may  be  obtained  according  to  for- 
mer practice,  without  any  actual  motion  for  the  same,  which  rule  shall 
require  such  return  to  be  made  within  four  days  next  after  the  service  of 
such  rule  if  served  in  London  or  Middlesex,  and  within  eight  days  in  all 
other  cases,  (m) 

If  the  writ  have  not  been  personally  served,  a  copy  of  the  rule  must  be 
served  on  those  to  whom  it  is  directed,  viz.,  those  to  whom  the  writ  and 
copies  were  directed  or  ordered  to  be  served,  the  original  rule  being  at  the 
same  time  shown,  otherwise  the  Court  will  not  grant  an  attachment  ;(it) 
but  if  the  writ  have  been  personally  served,  in  such  case  personal  service 
of  the  rule  is  unnecessary,  (o) 

If  the  return  be  not  made  and  filed  according  to  the  exigency  of  the 
r*^4.n  ^^^*^?  ^^^  Court  will,  upon  an  affidavit  of  service,  and  of  the  non- 
*compliance,  grant  an  attachment. (p)  As,  however,  it  is  not 
usual  for  the  Court  at  once  to  grant  an  attachment,  but  only  a  rule  nisi, 
upon  an  affidavit  of  service,  both  of  the  side  bar  rule,  and  also  of  the  writ 
and  copies,  it  is  more  advisable  for  the  prosecutor  to  be  prepared  with  an 
affidavit  of  service  of  the  original  writ  and  copies  in  the  first  instance,  to 
avoid  the  proceeding  of  a  side  bar  rule,  as  the  Court  will,  on  motion  and 
production  of  such  an  affidavit  only,  grant  a  rule  nisi  for  an  attachment, 

{k)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  184. 

[I)  Ante,  p.  6,  n.  [p),  332  (e).  Dacosta  v.  Russia  Company,  Stra.  783.  S.  C. 
Fitzg.  4.  S.  C.  1  Barn.  24  ;  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  2  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D. 
6  ;  2  Salk.  429;  Ld.  Raym.  391,  848,  1233  ;  6  Mod.  25  ;  Skin.  669  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
"  Man."  (H.)  Mayor  of  Coventry's  case,  Holt,  440.  An  affidavit  of  service  was 
usually  produced. 

(to)  See  rule,  App.  As  to  duration  of  rule  in  town  cases,  R.  v.  Betleswortb, 
Stra.  857,  956,  1111.     S.  C.  7  Mod.  218. 

(n)  R.  V.  North  Rid.  (J.),  7  Q.  B.  155.f 

(o)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  184.     See  ante,  p.  331,  n.  (n). 

\p)  See  rule  ante,  p.  6,  n.  (o),  331,  n.  [q).     See  post,  tit.  "  Attachment." 


RETURN,     ETC.  389 

witliout  resorting  to  a  side  bar  rule,  so  that  the  trouble  and  delay  of  a  side 
bar  rule  and  service  may  thus  be  avoided  altogether,  (g-) 

The  Return.]  When  necessary. — In  the  preceding  Chapter  we  have 
shewn,  that  the  mandatory  clause  of  the  writ  commands  in  the  alterna- 
tive, that  is,  either  to  perform  the  act  or  duty  therein  stated,  or  to  shew 
cause,  &c.,  therefore  the  defendant  may  at  once  proceed  to  the  execution 
of  the  writ ;  which  course,  though  he  pursue,  yet  strictly  he  should  make 
a  return  that  he  has  done  so,(r)  it  having  been  decided,  that  the  Court 
will  not  only  refuse  to  supersede  the  writ,  on  atfidavit  that  its  mandatory 
clause  was  obeyed  before  the  writ  was  granted,(.s)  but  will  rigidly  adhere 
to  the  incontrovertible  maxim  of  law  upon  this  subject,  that  "the  writ 
must  be  returned  as  executed,  or  its  execution  legally  excused(;)  or  justi- 
fied." 

Where  the  command  of  the  writ  is  executed,  the  form  of  return  is 
nothing  more  than  a  succinct  statement  that  the  writ  has  been  complied 
with,  following  the  words  of  the  mandatory  clause,  and  adding  "  as  by  the 
aforesaid  writ  is  commanded. "(?f) 

If,  however,  by  the  arrival  of  the  return  day,  or  by  the  expiration  of 
any  further  time  for  the  retui'n,  the  defendant  may  not  have  had  sufficient 
time  to  execute  the  command  of  the  writ,  such  a  fact  may  be  returned,  by 
stating  that  "  from  time  to  time  divers  matters  and  things  have  been  exe- 
cuted for  the  purpose  of  complying  with  the  writ,  and  that  further  matters 
and  things  are  in  the  course  of  procedure."  (??) 

*The  writ  need  not  be  answered,  where  the  return  is  to  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Court,(it;)  nor  in  such  a  case  can  the  prosecu- '-         -• 
tor  effectually  take  exceptions  to  such  return,  because  the  writ  is  bad.(.'K) 

If  the  defendant  do  not  intend  to  pei-form  the  act  or  duty  commanded 
by  the  mandatory  clause  of  the  writ,  nor  to  subject  himself  to  an  attach- 
ment, he  must  proceed  to  obey  the  alternative  part  of  such  clause  by 
making  "a  return"  thereto,  which  usually  consists  either  of  traverses 
which  contradict  some  material  suggestion  or  ground  of  the  writ,  or  of  a 
special  statement  of  the  merits  of  the  defendant's  case,  which  latter,  on 
account  of  its  great  importance  and  difficulty  in  framing,  should  in  gene- 
ral be  prepared  and  settled  by  counsel  ;(3/)  for  notwithstanding  how  dif- 

{q)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  184,  185. 

(/•)  Ante,  p.  6,  n.  (n),  340,  n.  {a).  R.  v.  Milverton  (Manor),  3  A.  &  E.  28G,f  n. 
[d);  Bull.  N.  P.  201. 

(s)  Anon.,  1  Barn.  362. 

{t)  Latch.  229,  per  Keeling,  C.  J.;  2  Keb.  168.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1 
Doug.  154.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  93  b.  R.  v.  Claphani,  1  Vent.  111.  R.  v.  Abing- 
don (Mayor),  2  Salk.  432.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  559.  S.  C.  Holt,  436,  438,  441.  R.  v. 
Stirling,  Say.  174.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man,"  (I.)    See  ante,  p.  340,  n.  {a). 

(w)  R.  Y.  Lowton  Parish,  11  Mod.  301.     See  "  Mandatory  Clause,"  p.  323. 

(y)  R.  V.  Ouze  Bank  Commissioners,  3  A.  &  E.  549,  550, f  per  Littledale,  J.  See 
also  Stra.  *763.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1479,  as  to  return  of  "  tarde,"  and  also  ante,  tit. 
"Drainage"  (Rate,  Return),  p.  121. 

iw)  R.  V.  Patrick,  1  Keb.  611. 

he)  R.  V.  New  Coll.,  2  Lev.  15. 

\y)  Bull.  N.  P.  tit.  "  Man."     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."     Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  183. 


390  tapping's    mandamus. 

ficult  soever  the  framing  of  a  rcturu  may  be,  the  Court  ^Yill  not  assist  the 
defendant,  nor  direct  how  it  shall  be  made.(i) 

.]     Sj>ecies  of  Return. — Ileturns  to  writs  of  mandamus  are  of 

three  kinds :  1st.  Traverses;  2nd.  Special  Returns,  or  those  of  confes- 
sion and  avoidance;  3rd.  A  statement  in  the  nature  of  a  Demurrer  to 
the  writ. 

Before  we  proceed  to  consider  returns  agreeably  with  the  above  analysis, 
we  wish  to  make  mention,  in  order  to  avoid  repetition,  of  a  few  points 
which  have  relation  to  returns  in  general. 

.     Descn'2>tion  of  Defendants. — The  return,  as  to  the  description 

of  those  making  it,  should  be  expressed  according  to  its  legal  operation, 
and  should  not  set  out  the  actual  fact  or  facts  in  extenso.  Thus,  a  return 
jnade  by  the  mayor  and  major  part  of  the  aldermen,  &c.,  should  be  ex- 
pressed to  be  by  the  mayor,  aldermen,  &c. ;  for  the  act  of  the  mayor  and 
a  majority  of  a  corporation,  is  the  act  of  the  whole. («)  So  where  a  writ 
was  directed  to  the  head  of  a  college  by  his  Christian  and  surnames,  a 
return,  though  neither  subscribed  by  him,  nor  under  the  common  seal, 
was  held  to  be  good ;  the  latter  not  being  necessary,  because  the  writ  was 
not  directed  by  the  corporate  name.(&)  But  where  a  return  was  expressed 
in  this  form,  *'  ice  do  humhlij  certify  that  did  noininate  and  appoint,  &c." 
omitting  ''  loe,"  the  return  was  disallowed. (c) 

As  to  the  return  or  waiver  of  a  misnomer  of  the  defendant,  see  ante,  p. 
318,  319.((7) 

.     Relation  of  Return  as  to  Time. — The  return  to  a  writ 

L  -'of  ^mandamus  as  to  the  time  of  its  being  made,  has  legal  relation 
to  the  teste  and  date  of  the  writ ;  and  in  framing  a  return,  this  presump- 
tion should  be  steadily  kept  in  view,  or  the  return  may  be  successfully 
objected  to  for  insufficiency. (c) 

.]     1st.  Return  hy  icay  of  Traverse. — In  the  first  place  we  will 

treat  of  the  form  of  a  traverse,  and  in  the  second,  as  to  the  substance. 

:     Form  of  Traverse. — It  has  been  stated  in  several  parts  of  this 

work,(/)  that  the  general  rules-  of  pleading  are  applicable  to  cases  of 
mandamus,  and  their  incidental  proceedings ;  which  observation  has  no 
greater  force  than  when  it  has  reference  to  returns  by  way  of  traverse,  the 
form  of  such  returns  having  been  constantly  said  to  be  the  same  as  that 
of  common  traverses  in  a  personal  action. ((/) 

The  traverse  should,  in  term?,  follow  the  suggestion  or  supposal  of  the 

[z]  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  2.     See  ante,  p.  308,  309. 

(a)  R.  V.  Shrewsbury  (Mayor),  7  Mod.  203.  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk. 
431,  432.     Digbton  v.  Stratford-upon-Avon,  2  Keb.  641.     S.  C.  Raj'.  188. 

(6)  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  4  Jlod.  241.  S.  C.  Skin.  368.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  126, 
564.     Thetford's  case,  1  Salk.  192. 

(c)  R.  v.  Lancaster  (J.),  2  Barn.  430. 

(d)  R.  V.  Ipswich  (BaUifFs),  2  Salk.  434.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1233.  S.  C.  Holt, 
433. 

(e)  R.  V.  Round,  4  A.  &  E.  142.t     S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  427.f     S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  546. 
(/)  Ante,  p.  8,  n.  (r/),  309,  n.  (/). 

{ff)  See  Steph.  on  Plead.  Ind.  tit.  "  Traverse."  See  forms  of  traverse,  ante,  p. 
73,  194. 


RETURN,     ETC.  391 

writ  ;(7()  for  if  any  legal  fact,  necessarily  supposed  for  tlie  purposes  of  the 
writ  fail,  the  foundation  of  the  writ  fiiils.(?')  Also,  as  the  prosecutor  is 
supposed  to  know  his  own  title  best,  so  he  is  bound  by  the  terms  in  which 
he  alleges  it ;  therefore  if  the  title,  as  he  states  it,  be  denied  by  the  re- 
turn, it  is  enough  ;(J)  which  doctrine  is  precisely  the  same  as  one  which 
obtains,  as  to  traverses  in  personal  actions,  namely,  that  "  a  party  may, 
in  general,  traverse  a  material  allnjation  of  title  or  estate,  to  the  extent  to 
which  it  is  alleged,  though  it  need  not  have  been  alleged  to  that  extcnt."(7c) 
Thus  if  the  writ  be  generally  to  "  swear  in  those  chosen ;"  the  return  may 
be  generally,  that  "  they  were  not  chosen,"  for  the  exact  supposal  of  the 
writ  is  alone  traversed ;  so  for  the  like  reason,  if  the  writ  specially  set 
forth  that  "  they  were  chosen  '  dcbito  modo,'  "  the  return  may,  m  such 
case,  traverse  "  that  they  were  not  chosen  debito  modo  but  such  a  (non 
debito  modo)  return  to  a  general  writ,  without  such  words  (debito  modo) 
has  been  often  held  to  be  111,(0  *''s  being  a  negative  pregnant,  p^o^q-i 
which  formerly  was  held  to  be  a  fatal  defect,  but  which,  at  this  L  J 
day,  would  scarcely  be  held  to  be  a  gQod  ground  of  demurrer.(??i) 

The  traverse  must  not  be  too  large,  by  being  in  the  conjunctive,  as 
"  not  duly  elected,  and  admitted  and  sworn  ;"  but  should  be  in  the  dis- 
junctive, "  not  duly  elected,  or  admitted  or  sworn. "(«)  A  similar  rule 
obtains  as  to  traverses  in  personal  actions. (o) 

.]     Substance  of  Traverse. — As  to  the  substance  of  a  return  by 

way  of  traverse,  it  is  a  rule  that  every  distinct  and  material  allegation 
contained  in  the  writ,(  jj)  must,  if  it  be  intended  to  contradict  them  be 
traversed. (5') 

(A)  See  ante,  p.  8,  n.  (y).  Lambert's  case,  Garth.  170.  R.  v.  Dover  (Mayor), 
16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  97,  M.  0. ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (I.);  2  Salk.  434;  5  Mod.  11; 
Stra.  1235;  1  Show.  253;  Andr.  105. 

{i)  R.  V.  Williams,  8  B.  &  C.  683.     S.  C.  3  M.  &  R.  404,  per  Parke,  J. 

(y)  R.  V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  81a.  R.  v.  Maiden  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym. 
481.     S.  C.  2  Salk.  431. 

(k)  Steph.  on  PI.  282,  5th  edit. 

(Z)  See  ante,  p.  73.  R.  v.  Twitty,  7  Mod.  83.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  433.  S.  C.  Holt, 
442;  16L.  J.,  N.  S.  97,  M.  C,  supra;  Gas.  t.  Hard.  130,  n.  (1);  Gom.  Dig.  tit. 
"  Man."  D.  3.  R.  v.  Hill,  1  Show.  253.  Lambert's  case.  Garth.  170.  S.  G.  12  Mod. 
3.  R.  V.  Aldborough  (Mayor),  10  Mod.  100.  S.  G.  1  Keb.  308.  R.  v.  Williams,  8 
B.  &  G.  G83.f  S.  G.  3  M.''&  R.  405.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  80,  81  a, 
83,  84.  Grawford  v.  Powell,  Burr.  1013.  R.  v.  Taunton  St.  James,  Gowp.  413. 
See  R.  V.  Kelk,  12  A.  &  E.  559.t  R.  v.  Hereford,  1  Keb.  655,  660,  716.  S.  G.  1 
Sid.  209,  210.     R.  v.  Ghester  ''Gity),  5  Mod.  11.     R.  v.  Ward  (Dr.),  2  Keb.  284. 

(/«)  R.  V.  Ghester  (Gity),  5  Mod.  11.  R.  v.  Ward  (Dr.),  2  Keb.  284.  R.  v.  Lyme 
Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  80,  84.  R.  v.  Maidstone  (Gorp.),  1  Keb.  660,  665,  733. 
Hereford's  case,  1  Keb.  716.  S.  G.  1  Sid.  209.  R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  75. 
See  Steph.  on  PI.  419,  421,  422,  5th  edit. 

{7i)  R.  V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  79,  85  ;  Steph.  on  PI.  281,  5th  edit. ;  Gom. 
Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  '-Man."  (I.),  n. 

(o)  See  Steph.  on  PI.  281,  5th  edit. 

(7))  Anon.,  2  Barn.  106.  See  form  of  traverses,  1  G.  &  D.  343;  also  with  an 
absque  hoc,  2  B.  &  Ad.  200.f  See  stats.  9  Ann.  c,  20,  s.  2  (E.),  and  1  Wm.  4,  c,  21  (E.), 
App.  and  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12  (I.),  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113  (L),  App.  See  Steph.  on 
PL  278,  5th  edit. 

(q)  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  70.  R.  v.  Ward,  Fitzg.  195.  R.  v.  Saltash 
(Mayor),  Raym.  432.  S.  G.  Jon.  177.  R.  v.  Williams,  8  B.  &  C.  683.t  S.  G.  3  M. 
&  R.  405.    R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  276.f     R.  x.  Durham  (Mayor),  Burr. 


392  tapping's    mandamus. 

As  sucli  of  the  material  suggestions  and  allegations  of  the  writ,  which 
arc  not  denied  or  traversed  by  the  return,  are,  in  contemplation  of  law, 
adlnittcd  by  the  defendant  to  be  true  ;(r)  so  the  return  should  be  so  framed 
that  the  defendant  does  not  estop  himself  from  relying  on  all  the  merits  of 
his  defetice.  Thus,  where  a  return  to  a  mandamus  to  compel  the  affixing 
of  a  common  seal,  merely  insisted  on  the  right  to  withhold  consent,  and 
to  refuse  the  seal;  the  Court  held,  that  the  defendant  could  not  oliject 
that  there  was  no  corporate  resolution  under  seal,  nor  that  the  writ  ineffi- 
ciently stated  the  custody  of  the  seal,  nor  that  no  presentation  had  been 
actually  tendered  for  signature,  nor  that  the  majority  having  only  voted 
orally,  might  retract  their  resolution. (.s)  So  where  the  defendant  has  ad- 
mitted a  particular  fact,  for  one  purpose,  he  cannot,  by  the  same  return, 
deny  the  truth  of  such  fact  for  another. (^) 

A  traverse  of  immaterial  matter  is,  however,  bad.(?;) 

*Whilst  the  common  law  strictness,  as  to  the  certainty  requisite 
L  J  to  a  return  prevailed,  many  cases  were  decided,  in  which  returns 
were  held  to  be  bad,  because  defective  for  that  description  of  uncertainty 
termed  "  negative  pregnant,"  that  is  "  such  a  form  of  negative  expression 
as  implied  or  carried  within  it  an  affimative ;  thus  a  return  of  non  fuit 
debito  modo  electus,  to  a  writ  which  merely  alleged  an  "  election"  has 
been,  for  such  cause,  held  to  be  bad  ;(r)  and  also  a  return  which  alleged 
"non  fuit  amotus  per  nos. "(?'•)  So  a  return  of  '' nunquara  fuit  debito 
modo  admissus,"  has  been  held  to  be  a  bad  return ;  the  Court  holding 
that  it  should  have  been  non  fuit  admissus  generally,  and  the  alleged 
ground  of  the  decision  was,  that  if  the  return  were  false,  the  prosecutor 
could  not  upon  such  an  allegation,  found  an  action  upon  the  case  for  a  false 
return. (.r)  A  difference  of  construction  has,  however,  been  held  to  exist 
between  "  debite  amotus"  and  "non  debite  electus"  or  "admissus,"  in 
this,  that  non  debite  electus  implies  "  elected,"  and  therefore  must  shew 
how  which  is  otherwise  in  the  case  of  debite  amotus. (,y)  It  has  also  been 
held  that  a  return  which  alleged  that  a  corporate  body  were  not  duly 
assembled,  to  proceed  to  the  election  of  a  recorder,  was  bad,  because  it 

129.  E.  T.  Kelk,  12  A.  &  E.  obO.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  185.  R.  v.  Brancaster  (Clnu'ch- 
wdns.),  Y  A.  &  E.  459.t  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  580.  R.  v.  Pavn,  G  A.  &  E.  404.1  S.  C.  1 
N.  &  P.  524.1     See  infra,  n.  (r). 

(r)  Supra,  n.  {q).  R.  v.  Buckingham  (Corp.),  10  Mod.  74.  R.  v.  Thames  (Com- 
missioners), 5  A.  &  E.  804.f  R.  V.  Ipswich  (Bailiffs),  Salk.  434,  IG.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym. 
1233.  S.  C.  Holt,  443. 

(s)  R.  V.  Kendall,  1  Q.  B.  3GG.t  S.  G.  4  P.  &  D.  602.  S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  J37, 
Q.  B. 

(t)  R.  T.  Bettesworth,  1  Barn.  299. 

{u)  R.  V.  Eastern  Counties  Railway-,  10  A.  k  E.  562.t  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.  But  see 
R.  V.  Penrice,  Str.  1235.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  81  a. 

(w)Ante,  p.  V3,  309,  n.  (h),  349,  n.  (/«).  Maiiaton's  case,  Ray.  3G5.  Hereford's 
case,  1  Sid.  209,  210;  1  Show.  253.  Lambert's  case,  Carth.  170;  Com.  Dig  tit. 
"Man."  D.  5  ;  Steph.  on  PI.  421 ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (L)  See  post,  p.  353. 

(zf)Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  5.  But  see  Lucas  v.  Colchester  (Mayor),  P.  19,  3, 
cited  in  Hereford's  case,  1  Sid.  210.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  655.  See  ante,  p.  194  (z). 

(z)  Hereford's  case  1  Sid.  209.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  655,  716,  733 ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man." 
(L)  R.  T.  Williams,  8  B.  &  C.  681.  S.  C.  3  M.  &  R.  405. 

(y)R.  V.  Chester,  (Mayor,)  Comb.  308.     S.  C.  5  Mod.  5.  See  supra,  n.  (iv). 


RETURN,     ETC. 


893 


contained  a  negative  pregnant  ;(,^)  but  it  has  also  been  held,  that  a  return 
of  ''  elected,"  yhall  mean  dehitc  modo  clcctus,  for  non  pra^stat  impcdi- 
mentum  quod  de  jure  non  sortitur  efFectum.(a) 

The  defect  that  a  return  in  a  "negative  pregnant/'  is  at  this  day  dis- 
countenanced by  the  Courts. (?*) 

In  accordance  with  the  rule  which  obtains  as  to  traverses  in  a  personal 
action  ;(c)  so  in  mandamus  cases  "  a  traverse  cannot  be  of  matter  of  fact, 
not  alleged  in  the  writ/'  that  is,  neither  actually  nor  by  legal  supposition 
or  implication.  Yet  a  traverse  will  be  good  if  it  pursue  and  deny  a  ma- 
terial suggestion  of  the  writ,  which  though  not  expressly  alleged,  is  im- 
plied by  law.  Thus  where  the  writ  suggested,  that  A.  was  chosen  in 
Easter  week,  a  return  which  traversed  that  A.  was  so  elected  has  been 
held  good.(('^) 

*The  cases  on  the  subject  of  mandamus  also  shew  that  the  rtogj^-] 
pleading  rule,  namely,  that  "matters  of  law,  resulting  from  a 
statement  of  facts,  cannot  be  traversed,"  has  application  to  returns  by 
way  of  traverse.  Thus  the  conclusion,  "  by  reason  of  which  premises, 
W.  &c.,  was  duly  elected,  &c.,"  is  matter  of  law  for  the  decision  of  the 
Court  upon  the  facts,  some  one  of  which  should  have  been  traversed ;  c. 
g.,  that  he  had  fifty  votes,  &c.;  for  it  is  one  of  the  first  principles  of 
pleading,(e)  that  facts  alone  should  be  stated  which  must  be  done  for  the 
purpose  of  informing  the  Court,  whose  duty  it  is  to  declare  the  law  arising 
upon  those  facts,  and  to  apprise  the  opposite  party  of  what  is  meant  to  be 
proved,  in  order  to  give  him  an  opportunity  of  answering  or  traversing 

it.(/)  .       . 

If  on  the  one  hand  a  return  by  way  of  traverse  be  legally  defective,  it 
may  be  quashed,  either  on  motion,  or  upon  demurrer  ;(r/)  but  the  defend- 
ant may,  if  he  can,  on  the  argument,  impeach  the  validity  of  the  writ.(/t) 

(z)  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  G6.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (I.) 

(a)  Manaton's  case,  Raym.  365. 

(6)  Ante,  p.  348,  349,  n.  [m).     See  Steph.  on  PL  421,  5th  edit. 

(c)  Steph.  on  PI.  223,  5th  edit. 

id)  R.  T  Penrice,  Stra.  1235.  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  SkiH.  359.  Lambert's  case. 
Garth.  IVO.  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  164  ;  18  Hen.  8,  5,  34  Hen.  6,  49.  R.  v.  Hill,  1 
Show.  253.  R.  t.  Williams,  8  B.  &  C.  683,t  n.  (a).  R.  v.  Round,  4  A.  &  E.  142.t 
S.  C.  5N.  &  M.  427.t  R.  v.  Lynne,  (Mayor),  Andr.  105.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor), 
1  Douo-.  81  a.  Wright  v.  Fawcett,  Burr.  2044,  per  Aston,  J.  Anon.  Ray,  431.  Com. 
Dio-.  tit  "  Man."  D.  3,  D.  4.  R.  v.  Maiden  (Bailiffs),  2  Salk.  431.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym. 
481.  R.  V.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  432.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  559.  Braithwaite's 
case,  1  Vent.  19.  R.  v.  New  Windsor  (Mayor),  T  Q.  B.  Ol^.f  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
319,  Q.  B.  See  Steph.  on  PI.  220,  5th  edit. 

(e)  Steph.  on  PI.  p.  220,  5th  edit. 

(/•)  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  70.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  159, 
159,  n.  (F.)  R.  V.  Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  731,  732.  R.  v.  Hughes,  4  B.  &  C. 
379.f  R.  V.  Bristol  Dock,  2  Q.  B.  64.t  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  286.  S.  C.  2  Rail.  Cas. 
599.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (I.) 

(g)  Ante,  p.  7.  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  5G2.f  S.  C.  4  P. 
&  D.  48.  R.  v.  LA-me  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  85.  R.  v.  Brancaster  (Churchwar- 
dens\  7  A.  &  E.  458.f  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  580,  supra.  R.  v.  Kendall,  1  A.  &  E.,  N. 
S.  366.     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  603.     S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  137,  Q.  B. 

[h)  Clarke  v.  Leicestershire  Canal,  6  Q.  B.  898.f  See  post,  tits.  "  Quashing  Re- 
turn," "  Demurrer,"  and  ante,  p.  338. 


394  tapping's    mandamus. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  it  he  legally  sufficient,  issue  may  be  joined  there- 
on,(/)  in  either  of  which  cases  the  matter  proceeds  as  in  the  cases  of  ordi- 
nary actions. 

.]  2ud,  Sj^ecial  Returns,  or  those  in  Confession  and  Avoidance. — 

Having  treated  of  a  return  by  way  of  traverse,  we  now  proceed  to  the 
consideration  of  one  in  confession  and  avoidance,  which  we  propose  to 
treat  in  the  following  order,  viz.,  first,  as  to  its  form,  and  secondly,  as  to 
its  substance. 

.     Form. — As  before  statcd,(y)  when  the  defendant  seeks  either 

r*qf^9l  *''°  excuse  or  justify  the  non-execution  of  the  writ,  he  must,  by 
^  ■'  his  return,  in  direct  terms  state  the  grounds  of  his  excuse  or  jus- 
tification, and  must,  under  pain  of  an  attachment,  make  the  best  return 
his  case  admits  of.(/c) 

In  framing  the  returu,  it  is  incumbent  on  the  defendant  to  set  out  the 
Tvhole  legal  facts  of  his  case  in  extenso,  in  order  not  only  that  the  Court, 
whose  duty  it  is  to  declare  the  law  arising  upon  those  facts,  may  have  the 
means  both  of  judging  of  the  legality  of  such  excuse,  &c.,(/)  and  also  the 
means  of  ascertaining  whether  the  command  of  the  writ  have  been  com- 
plied with,(m)  but  also  in  order  to  apprize  the  prosecutor  of  the  grounds 
of  the  defendant's  defence,  in  order  to  afi"ord  him  an  opportunity  of  an- 
swering or  traversing  them  by  his  plea;  therefore  the  return  will  not  be 
sufficient  if  made  in  general  terms. («)  A  special  return  must  not  only 
be  good  in  substance,  but  must  be  expressed  in  apt  words  ;(o)  or,  in  other 
words,  the  language  and  the  rules  of  pleading  in  personal  actions  should 
be  adopted. (^j) 

The  return  must  not  be  evasive  nor  contemptuous, (f^)  nor  frivolous,(/-) 
nor  nonsensical,(s)  or  the  Court  will  quash  it  either  on  motion  or  demur- 
rer, and  grant  a  peremptory  mandamus.  Thus,  in  an  extreme  case, 
where  certain  justices  made  a  shuffling  return  that  a  rate  was  not  made 
secundum  actum  Parliamcnti,  the  Court  granted  an  attachment. (?)     So 

{i)  Ante,  p.  7.  R.  v.  Brancaster  (Churchwardens),  T  A.  &  E.  458.f  S.  C.  2  N. 
k  P.  580.     See  post,  tits.  "  Replication,"  "  Issue." 

(  /)  Ante,  p.  194,  195,  n.  (0,  340,  n.  (a),  and  "Form  of  Traverse,"  p.  348. 

(k)  See  ante,  p.  6,  n.  (o),  194,  195,  n.  {e),  (/).  R.  v.  Long,  1  Barn.  82.  R.  v. 
Raines,  3  Salk.  232,  and  see  ante,  319,  n.  {I),  as  to  estoppel. 

(Z)  Ante,  p.  195,  n.  (e).  R.  v.  Stafifordsh.  (J.),  6  A.  &  E.  84.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
2T7.f     See  infra,  tit.  "Demurrer." 

[m)  R.  V.  Ouze  Bank  (Coramrs.),  3  A.  &  E.  548.t     See  supra,  n.  {I). 

(n)  See  ante,  p.  348,  n.  (/).  R.  v.  Ouze  Bank  Commrs.,  3  A.  &  E.  544.f  R.  v. 
Bristol  Dock,  1  G.  &  D.  289.     S.  C.  2  Q.  B.  64.f     S.  C.  2  Rail.  Cas.  599. 

(o)  London  (City)  v.  Estwick,  Sty.  32.     See  ante,  p.  309,  n.  (d),  (e). 

It  has  been  decided  that  a  return  which  stated  the  "  year"  in  Roman  figures,  was 
not  for  that  cause  invalid.     Butler  (Dr.)  v.  Cobbett,  11  Mod.  225. 

[p)  Ante,  p.  8,  n.  (y).  R.  v.  Shrewsbury  (Mayor),  7  Mod.  203,  where  the  word 
"  duly,"  in  a  return,  is  held  to  be  a  sufficient  allegation,  as  in  an  ordinary  plead- 
ing.    See  supra,  n.  (o). 

(q)  R.  V.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  405.f     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524.     S.  C.  W.  W.  k  D.  99. 

(r)  R.  V.  Robinson,  8  Mod.  33G.  R.  v.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  406-1  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
524. t    See  post,  tit.  "Attachment." 

(s)  R.  v.  Ouze  Bank  Commrs.,  3  A.  &  E.  544,t  and  see  10  A.  &  E.  556.1 

(t)  Cited  in  R.  v.  Long,  1   Barn.  82.     If   the  prosecutor  intend  to  treat  the 


RETURN,     ETC.  395 

wliere  to  a  mandamus  to  elect  a  mayor,  to  ha  chosen  out  of  the  ahler- 
men,  the  return  was  that  "  there  were  no  aldermen,"  the  Court  hold 
the  return  to  be  frivolous,  and  granted  an  attachment  against  the  defend- 
ant. (y{) 

*The  return  must  be  neither  inveigling  nor  hypothetical,  for  ifMcogo-i 
it  have  either  of  such  defects,  the  Court  will  quash  it.(t-) 

The  averments  of  the  return  must  be  certain. (»•).  The  certainty  re- 
quired by  the  common  law(a;)  is  by  some  of  the  cases  stated  to  have  been 
certainti/  to  every  intent,  and  therefore  a  greater  certainty  than  is  requisite 
to  a  plea.(,y)  Other  cases  have  decided  that  the  certainty  or  strictness 
which  prevailed  at  common  law  was  the  same  as  that  which  governed 
estoppels,  indictments,  or  returns  to  writs  of  habeas  corpus ;(.;)  and  as  to 
them,  it  is  laid  down  that  nothing  is  to  be  taken  or  construed  by  intend- 
ment or  inference,  so  that  all  material  facts  should  be  positively  and  dis- 
tinctly alleged. («)  Thus  it  has  been  held  not  to  have  been  sufficient  to 
return  such  matter  as  might  be  falsified  in  an  action  for  a  false  return,  but 
that  it  was  necessary  so  to  aver  legal  facts  that  the  Court  might  be  able 
to  judge  of  them,  and  determine  whether  they  formed  an  excuse  or  justi- 
fication sufficient  in  law  or  not,(Zy)  which  strictness  was  rec[uired,  because 
the  prosecutor  at  common  law  (previously  to  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  (E.),  or 
Stat.    19    Geo.   2,    c.    12    (I.)  ),   could   neither   traverse,    interplead, (c) 

return  as  a  contempt,  upon  matter  shewn  in  the  affidavits,  he  should  proceed  by 
way  of  motion  for  an  attachment.  R.  v.  Round,  4  A.  &  E.  139.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M. 
427.t     R.  V.  Payn,  G  A.  &  E.  404.t     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524.1 

(w)  R.  v.  Robinson,  8  Mod.  336.  R.  v.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  40G.f  S.  C.  1  X.  &  P. 
524.     See  supra,  n.  (r). 

Iv)  R.  V.  Old  Hall  Manor,  10  A.  &  E.  253,  254.f  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  518.  S.  C. 
"W.  W.  &  D.  650.  R.  T.  Norwich  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  1244.  S.  0.  2  Salk. 
436,  17. 

[w)  R.  V.  London  Dock,  5  A.  &  E.  163.f  S.  C.  6  N.  &M.  SOO.f  The  Court  will, 
in  most  cases,  allow  an  amendment.     See  post,  p.  368,  369. 

{x)  R.  V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  154.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  93  b.  R.  v. 
Clapham,  1  Vent.  111.  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  432.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym. 
559.  S.  C.  Holt,  436,  438,  441.  S.  C.  Fitzg.  194.  R.  v.  Stirling-,  Say.  174.  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (I.) 

[y)  Bull.  N.  P.  201.  R.  v.  Exeter  (Mayor),  1  Show.  365.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  36,  37, 
and  cases  there  cited.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  153.  R.  v.  Richardson, 
Burr.  517.  "R.  v.  Cambridge  (U.),  Stra.  559.  Waggoner's  case,  8  Rep.  122.  R.  v. 
Doncastcr  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  1564.  S.  C.  Say.  37.  R.  v.  Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr. 
723.  R.  V.  St.  Andrew  (Parish),  10  A.  &  E.  738.t  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk. 
432.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  559. 

{z)  R.  V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  83,  84,  153,  per  Buller,  J.,  158.  R.  v. 
Hutchinson,  8  Mod.  101,  n.  [d).  S.  C.  Fort.  204.  R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  69. 
R.  V.  Bristol  Dock,  6  B.  &  C.  186.f     S.  C.  9  D.  &  R.  309-1 

(a)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  458.     Patrick's  case,  Raym.  103. 

{b)  Ante,  p.  352,  n.  [1).  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (L),  cited  in  R.  v.  Kendall,  4  P.  & 
D.  615.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  366,1  and  cases  there  cited.  R.  v.  Gloucester  (JIayor),  3 
Bulst.  189.  S.  C.  1  Roll.  409.  S.  C.  2  Show.  504.  R.  v.  Exeter  (Mayor),  Comb. 
197.  R.  V.  Stirling,  Say.  174,  per  Ryder,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Dr.  Harris,  1  W.  Blac.  430. 
S.  C.  Burr.  1420. 

(c)  Ante,  p.  7.  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  432.  S.  C.  12  Mod.  401.  S.C. 
Garth.  499.  S.  G.  Ld.  Raym.  559.  S.  G.  Holt,  436,  438,  441.  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"Man."D.  5.  R.  v.  Litchfield  (Ep.),  7  Mod.  217.  S.  C.  1  KeL  287.  S.  C.  2  Barn. 
365,  429.  R.  t.  Cooper's  Company,  7  T.  R.  546.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1 
Doug.  83,  84,  155.     Protector  v.  Kingston-upon-Thames,  Sty.  481.    But  see  Exeter 


806  TArriNo's    mandamus. 

r*QPin  *^°^  I'cply  as  to  a  pica  in  a  personal  action, (</)  and  it  was  at  least 
'-  -'  doubtful  whether  a  writ  of  error  lay  ;(c)  so  that  the  return  was 
then  conclusivc,(/)  except  that  the  prosecutor  might,  if  it  were  false  in 
fact,  avail  himself  of  the  collateral  proceedings  by  way  of  action  on  the 
case,  or  information  for  a  false  return. (y) 

Notwithstanding  this  rigor  of  the  common  law  as  to  "  certainty,"  the 
consequent  difficulty  of  framing  returns,  and  the  hardship  upon  defend- 
ants, yet  as  the  passing  of  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  was  intended  for  the 
benefit  of  persons  suivg  out  writs  of  mandamus,  in  certain  cases  the  Court 
soon  and  constantly  decided  that  such  statute  did  not  take  away  the  strict- 
ness which  the  common  law  required  as  to  returns, (7i)  or  in  other  words, 
that  the  same  strictness  in  returns  was  equally  necessary  after  as  before 
the  statute.(i)  In  process  of  time,  however,  the  Court  of  B.  11.,  in  their 
decisions,  somewhat  departed  from  the  strictness  of  the  common  law,  and 
by  a  current  of  authority  gradually  established  the  more  liberal  rule,  viz., 
that  the  certainty  necessary  to  a  return  is  "  certainty  to  a  certain  intent  in 
general,"  which  means  that  which  upon  a  fair  and  reasonable  construction 
may  be  called  certain,  without  recurring  to  possible  facts  which  do  not  ap- 
pear. Thus,  if  the  return  be  certain  upon  the  face  of  it,  that  is  sufficient, 
as  the  Court  cannot  presume  facts  inconsistent  with  it  for  the  purpose  of 
making  it  bad;  for  it  has  been  judicially  observed,  that  if  such  presump- 
tions were  to  be  allowed,  certainty  in  every  particular  would  be  necessary, 
and  no  man  could  draw  a  valid  and  sufficient  return. (J) 

The  following  is  a  statement  of  some  of  the  decisions  as  to  "  certainty" 
in  a  return,  which  are  here  inserted,  in  order  that  the  reader  may 
ascertain  from  the  cases  the  nature  of  the  certainty  required.  Thus,  a 
*return  of  "  non  fuit  tempore  receptionis  brevis  deputatus  consti- 
1^  -^  tutus"  has  been  held  to  be  nought,  for  though  the  prosecutor  may 
have  been  made  deputy,  and  before  the  receipt  of  the  writ  improperly 


(Ep.)  V.  Hele,  Show.  P.  C.  88,  96.  R.  v.  St.  Andrews,  10  A.  &  E.  Vse.f  R.  v 
Glide,  12  Mod.  29.  R.  v.  Rippon  (Town),  2  Keb.  15.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (K.) 
See  stats.  App..     See  post,  tit.  "  Pleas." 

(d)  1  T.  R.  546,  supra,  n.  (c).  Manaton's  case,  Raym.  365.  R.  v.  Slatford,  5 
Mod.  317.     S.  C.  2  Salk.  428.     S.  C.  Comb.  419.     S.  C.  Holt,  438. 

(e)  Ante,  p.  7.  R.  t.  Hull,  11  Mod.  390.  S  C.Ld.  Raym.  1447.  Bagg's  case,  11 
Rep.  93  b.     See  post,  tit.  "  Error." 

(/)  R.  T.  Claph.am,  1  Vent.  111.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  306.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  742.  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  5. 

(ff)  Ante,  p.  6,  n.  (?•),  and  see  post,  tit.  "Action  and  Information  for  false  re- 
turn." 

(h)  R.  V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  154.  S.  C.  Andr.  105.  R.  v.  Liverpool 
(Mayor),  Burr.  733. 

(?)  R.  V.  York,  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  G9,  supra.  R.  v.  Pomfret,  10  Mod.  103.  R.  v. 
Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  157,  per  Ld.  Mansfield,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Shrewsbury 
(Mayor),  2  Barn.  394.  R.  v.  Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  733,  per  Denison,  J.  R.  v. 
Doncaster  (Mavor),  Burr.  741.     R.  v.  Weymouth  (Boroughj,  7  Q.  B.  46.t 

(y)  R.  V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  159,  per  Buller,  J.  R.  v.  Monmouth 
(Mayor),  4  B.  &  A.  497.t  R.  v.  Carmarthen  (Mayor),  1  M.  &  S.  697.  Bac.  Abr. 
tit.  "Man."  (L),  n.     See  infra,  "Invalidating  Return." 


RETURN,     ETC.  397 

oustcLl,  yet  tlic  return  would  be  literally  truc.(Z-)  So  a  return  by  a  mayor, 
wbich  stated  *'  that  he  called  to  him  thirty  of  the  council  in  domo  concilii 
assemblati,  and  removed  the  prosecutor,"  had  been  held  insufficient,  be- 
cause it  did  not  appear  that  such  removal  was ''apud  commune  conci- 
lium."(0  So  a  return  which  alleged  ''  quod  procuravcrunt  eum  sum- 
moneri"  has  been  held  insufficient,  for  such  an  allegation  is  not  direct  as 
to  the  summoniDg.(»i)  So  where  a  return  stated  "that  the  prosecutor 
was  heard  de  aliis  criminibus  ei  objectis,"  without  saying  what,  before 
whom,  or  in  what  place,  has  been  held  to  be  bad.(n)  So  an  allegation 
that  the  prosecutor  was  auditus  in  communi  concilio,  without  saying  by 
whom,  &c,  is  also  bad.(o)  So  to  a  writ  which  commanded  the  defendant 
to  take  upon  himself  the  office  of  common  councilman  of  a  borough,  a  re- 
turn that  ''by  a  bye-law  persons  refusing  to  fill  that  office  are  subject  to 
a  certain  fine,  and  that  the  defendant  had  paid  the  fine,"  has  been  held  to 
be  insufficient,  as  it  did  not  state  that  the  fine  was  to  be  in  lieu  of  ser- 
vice.(o)  So  an  averment  that  "  the  prosecutor  did  not  account  for  money 
to  the  corporation,"  without  saying  that  he  was  requested  and  refused(7>)  is 
insufficient;  for  when  a  request  is  necessary  to  a  defence,  it  should  be 
alleged  in  the  return. (<^)  The  Court  of  B.  11.  has  also  decided  that  a 
return  was  insufficient  which  merely  stated  "  that  the  prosecutor  did  not 
take  the  oath  required  by  stat.  13  Car.  2,  before  the  mayor,"  without 
alleging  ''or  before  justices  of  the  peace,"  who  by  the  same  statute  have 
also  authority  to  administer  it.(r)  So  where  by  a  return,  a  custom  to 
remove  from  an  office,  ad  libitum,  was  alleged  by  way  of  recital,  and  not 
positively  that  there  was  such  a  custom,  such  a  return  was  held  to  be 
bad.(s)  So  a  return  of  "  non  sibi  constat,"  that  there  is  any  *such  j-^ocg-, 
custom,  has  been  held  to  be  bad,  because  it  was  neither  positive  L  J 
nor  certain. (<)  Se  a  return  of  "  non  constat  nobis  that  he  was  even  elect- 
ed," has  been  also  held  to  be  bad  for  the  same  reason. («)  But  a  return 
modo  et  forma  sequent!  is  well  enough. (y) 

(k)  R.  V.  Clapham,  1  Yent.  111.  S.  C.  1  Lev.  30G.  S.  C.  2  Keb.  142.  S.  C 
Fitzg.  194.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  5.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (I.) 

(l)  Mayor  of  Gloucester's  case,  3  Bulst.  189.  £.  C.  1  Roll.  409.  R.  v.  Wilton 
(Mavor),  5  Mod.  258.  R.  v.  Glide,  12  Mod.  29.  R.V.Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr. 
732."    R.  V.  Taylor,  2  Salk.  451. 

(m)  See  ante,  p.  203,  n.  {w).  Braithwaite's  case,  1  Vent.  19.  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"  Man."  D.  5. 

(n)  See  ante,  p.  203,  n.  («)•  R-  v.  Wilton  (Mayor),  5  Mod.  258.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym. 
225.     R.  V.  Glide,  12  Mod.  29.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  5. 

(o)  R.  V.  Bower,  1  B.  &  C.  585.t  S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  842.1  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 
(L). 

[p)  R.  V.  Wilton  (Mayor),  5  Mod.  259.  See  "  Demand  and  Refusal."  p.  282—287. 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  5. 

(q)  R.  V.  Wilton  (Mayor),  5  Mod.  259.     S.  C.  2  Salk.  428. 

(V)  R.  V.  Slatford,  5  Mod.  318.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  429.  S.  C.  Burr.  1452.  S.  C. 
Holt,  438.     Cora.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  5.' 

(s)  R.  V.  Coventry  (Mayor),  Salk.  430.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  391.  S.  C.  Holt,  438. 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  5. 

(<)  Anon.,  1  Vent.  2G7.  Andrews  v.  Lakin,  Noy,  139,  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man." 
D.  5. 

(u)  Recorder  of  Barnstable's  case,  P.  18  Car.  2,  Raym.  153,  cited  in  Manaton's 
case,  Raym.  365.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (I). 

{v)  PuUea  V.  Palmer,  Ld.  Raym.  496. 


398  tapping's    mandamus. 

The  Court  of  B.  R.  has  also  held  a  return  to  a  mandamus  to  restore 
common  councilmen  to  their  office,  "  that  they  were  chosen  yearly,  and 
that  before  the  coming  of  the  writ  they  were  chosen  and  continued  for  a 
year^  and  at  the  end  of  the  year  were  duly  amoved  from  their  offices  by 
the  election  of  others,  to  be  bad  for  its  uncertainty,  for  it  ought  to  have 
shewn  the  time  they  were  elected  or  removed,  so  that  it  might  have  ap- 
peared they  were  not  removed  before  the  year  expired. (w)  So  to  a  man- 
damus to  restore  to  the  office  of  capital  burgess  a  return  which  stated  the 
ground  of  the  disfranchisement  to  have  been  non-attendance  of  the  prose- 
cutor at  a  meeting,  to  which  he  was  summoned,  for  the  election  of  a  capital 
burgess,  and  an  averment  that  the  right  of  such  election  was  in  the  capital 
burgesses,  being  the  common  council,  has  been  held  not  to  assert  with 
sufficient  certainty  that  the  prosecutor  should  have  concurred  in  the  elec- 
tion, and  ought  to  have  obeyed  the  summons,  because  consistently  with 
such  an  averment  he  might  not  have  had  that  right,  as  it  did  not  appear 
by  the  return  that  all  the  capital  burgesses  were  members  of  the  common 
council. (.r)  So  a  return  which  stated  that  a  certain  meeting  "was  not 
duly  assembled,"  without  showing  in  what  particular  the  assembly  was 
not  a  due  one,  it  being  by  the  return  admitted  that  it  was  duly  assembled 
for  some  other  purpose,  has  been  held  to  be  too  vague  and  uncertain. (y) 
So  a  return  which  admitted  the  prosecutor's  qualification  thus,  "that 
there  were  five  Court  days,  at  which  persons  should  have  been  admitted, 
that  the  prosecutor  had  notice,  and  did  not  appear,  and  therefore  could 
not  be  admitted,"  has  been  held  to  be  bad,  because  it  did  not  set  forth 
that  he  could  not  have  been  admitted  at  any  other  than  on  tho.se  five 
days.(^) 

As  every  allegation  of  a  return  must  be  direct,  and  be  stated  in  the 
most  unqualified  manner,  it  follows,  that  in  accordance  with  the  rules 
of  pleading,  although  they  do  not  in  terms  apply  to  the  pleadings  of 
r>fcnr7-|  *mandamus,  that  a  return  which  denies  the  matters  of  the  writ  with 
^  "  a  protestando,  is  ill.  There  is  no  instance  in  which  a  protestando 
can  be  adopted  in  a  return. (a) 

The  business  of  pleading  being  to  set  forth  facts,  and  not  to  draw 
inferences  of  law,(Z')  it  follows,  that  the  facts,  the  subject-matter  of  a 
return,  must  not  be  stated  either  ivfercntlaVy  or  argumentaticrly,  but 
with  certainty  and  plainness,  (c)     The  defect  of  argumentativeness  is  held 

(w)  R.  V.  Chester  (City),  5  Mod.  10.  S.  C.  Comb.  307.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  230.  S.  C. 
Ilolt,  438.     White's  case,  6  Mod.  18  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  5. 

(x)  R.  V.  Lyme  Re^is  (Mayor),  1  Doug-.  177.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3.  And 
see  R.  V.  Monmouth  (Mayor),  4  B.  &  C.  406.t     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (I.) 

(v)  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.R.  69,  74.     See  ante,  355. 

(z)  R.  V.  Whiskin,  Andr.  1 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  4. 

{a)  R.  V.  Bristol  Dock,  9  D.  &  R.  SOO.f  S.  C.  6  B.  &  C.  181.t  R.  v.  Luton 
Roads,  1  G.  &  D.  250.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  SGO.f     See  Reg.  G.,  H.,  4  Wm.  4,  r.  12. 

{b)  Ante,  p.  309,  n.  {h),  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  155.  See  Steph.  on 
PI.  207,403,  422,  5th  edit. 

(r)  R.  V.Lyme  Regis,  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  179;  Stra.  115.  R.  v.  Hereford  (Mayor), 
G:Mod.  309.  R.  v.  Stevens,  cited  in  1  Doug.  179.  R.  v.  Richardson,  Burr.  517.  R. 
V.  London  (Mayor),  4  Doug.  360,  382.f     R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  559. 


RETURN,     ETC.  399 

to  be  fatal  to  a  return  to  a  writ  of  mandamus,  because,  by  its  uncertainty, 
it  bars  the  prosecutor  of  bis  action  for  a  false  return.  Thus,  a  return 
that  "  no  Sacrament  was  taken  before  election,  per  quod  electio  vacua  et 
non  sunt  capitalcs  burgcnses,"  has  been  held  to  be  bad,  as  being  mere 
inference  from  the  premises. ((^^)  So,  a  return  whicli  stated,  "that  upon 
an  election,  B.  had  eighteen  voices,  and  the  prosecutor  but  seventeen,  and 
that  B.  had  been  sworn  in,"  has  been  held  to  be  defective  for  argumenta- 
tiveness, and  that  it  should  have  expressly  alleged  that  "the  prosecutor 
was  not  chosen. "(e)  So,  a  return  which  stated  that  "another  was  elected 
mayor  before  the  writ  delivered,  and  adhuc  est  major,"  without  saying 
"debito  modo  electus,"(/)  and  also,  a  return,  "quod  aervivit  et  jour- 
neyman potius  quam  servus,"  have  been  held  to  be  argumentative  and 
bad.(r/) 

If  by  reason  of  the  uncertainty  of  a  return,  the  prosecutor  cannot 
*plead  to  it,  the  Court  will,  either  on  motion  or  demurrer,  quash  r^oKQ-i 
it  for  such  defect,(^)  and  award  a  peremptory  writ  of  manda- 
mus. («') 

The  rule  of  pleading,  that  ^'matter  of  law  need  not  he  averred,"(J) 
governs  likewise  a  return  to  a  writ  of  mandamus ;  for  it  has  been  decided, 
that  if  to  a  given  statement  of  facts,  there  be  annexed  a  legal  presump- 
tion, the  facts,  and  not  the  presumption,  should  be  stated.  Thus  it  has 
been  held  to  be  unnecessary  to  aver  in  a  return  to  a  mandamus  to  restore, 
&c.,  that  a  power  of  amotion  is  vested  in  the  corporate  body  at  large  ; 
because  such  a  power  is  incidental  to  them,  unless  given  by  charter,  bye- 
law,  &c.,  to  a  select  part  thereof.  (^') 

It  has  been  held,  that  in  a  return  to  a  mandamus,  the  averment  of 
profert  is  never  made,  because  as  such  return  was  at  the  time  of  the  deci- 

S.  C.  2  Salk.  432.  R.  v.  Kendall,  4  P.  &  D.  G16.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  3G6.f  R.  v.  Chap- 
man, 6  Mod.  152. 

{d)  R.  V.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  559.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  432.  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "  Man."  D.  5. 

(e)  R.  V.  Hereford,  6  Mod.  309.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  TOl.  S.  C.  1  Sid.  209.  S.  C.  1 
Keb.  060,  716.  R.  v.  Thame  (Guardians),  Stra.  115.  Jones's  case,  2  Jon.  177,  178. 
R.  V.  Raines,  3  Salk.  232, 11.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  181  ;  Ld.  Raym. 
225,  559.  R.  v.  Doncaster,  Burr.  738.  R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  66,  73,  74.  R. 
T.  Illchester  (Bailiffs),  4  D.  &  R.  SSO.f  S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  724.1  S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  704.t 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  5.  See  R.  v.  Kendall,  1  Q.  B.  36G.t  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D. 
603. 

(/)  Manaton's  case,  Ray.  365.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3. 

(ff)  Townsend's  case,  Raym.  92  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  5.  In  R.  v.  Kendall, 
4  P.  &  D.  603.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  366.t  S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  137,  Q.  B.,  the  Court  said 
it  was  not  prepared  to  hold  that  a  return  is  necessarily  bad  for  the  defect  of  argu- 
mentativeness, if  the  facts  are  fully  set  forth  in  order  to  convince  the  Court  in  point 
of  law  that  the  right  as  claimed  does  not  exist.  And  see  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  16 
L.  J.,  N.  S.  185,  Q.B. 

(A)  See  ante,  p.  353,  n.  (w)  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  M.  &  S.  494.  Bagg's 
case,  11  Rep.  99  b.     R.  v.  Sterling,  Say.  174.     See  post,  tit.  "  Invalidating  return." 

(i)  Townsend's  case,  Raym.  93.     See  tit.  "  Peremptory  Writ." 

(/)  See  Steph.  on  PI.  467,  468,  5th  edit.     See  ante,  p.  351. 

{k)  Ante,  p.  199,  n.  (s).  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  149,  158.  R.  v. 
Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  731. 


400  tapping's    mandamus. 

sion  conclusive  ui^on  the  prosecutor,  be  could  ncitlicr  have  oyer,  nor  plead 
a  plca.(/) 

.]     Siihstance. — A  special  return  must  be  good  in  substance,(??i) 

otherwise  it  maybe  successfully  objected  to  and  quashed;  either  on  motion 
or  demurrer ;(n)  and  a  peremptory  writ  awarded. 

Every  good  legal  cause  why  the  prosecutor  is  not  entitled  to  the  writ, 
whether  it  arise  from  his  personal  incapacity  to  sue  it  out  and  prosecute 
it,  as  on  account  of  outlawry,  &c.,(o)  or  by  reason  of  the  absence  of  a 
legal  right  to  that  which  he  seeks,  will  alike  form  a  good  and  valid  return 
thereto,  (oo) 

The  return  will  be  bad,  if  it  shew  the  legal  liability  of  the  defendant, 
or  do  not  sufficiently  answer  the  mandatory  clause  of  the  writ.(^>)  Thus, 
to  a  mandamus,  the  eifect  of  which  is  to  ascertain  whether  a  discretion 
may  or  not  have  been  honestly  exercised,  it  is  not  sufficient  to  return 
that  "what  has  been  deemed  necessary,  has  been  donej"  for  it  should 
*state  what  has  been  done,  and  also  expressly  allege  that  no  more 
[  doJJ  ^^_^g  necessary,  in  order  that  a  traverse  may  be  taken  which  other- 
wise is  impossible. ((^)  Nor  is  a  return  sufficient,  if  it  merely  aver  matter 
of  fact,  which  the  prosecutor  may  be  able  to  falsify  in  an  action  on  the 
case  for  a  false  return ;  because  such  matter  should  be  so  particularly 
alleo'ed,  that  the  Court  may  also  be  able  to  judge  of  it,  and  determine 
whether  it  be  sufficient  or  not.(r)  In  some  of  the  older  cases,  however, 
a  general  return  has  been  held  to  be  sufficient,  but  on  examination  it 
will  be  found,  that  such  returns  Avere  fortified  by  something  of  credit. 
Thus,  a  return  which  merely  stated  "  that  the  prosecutor  had  been  con- 
victed of  enormous  crimes,"  they  not  being  particularly  alleged,  has  been 
held  insufficient ;  but  it  appeared  that  the  visitor  had  given  sentence, 
which  could  not  have  been  if  the  writ  had  been  prayed  before  sen- 
tence.(s) 

A  return  which  shews  a  legal  impossibility  to  perform  what  the  writ 
commands,  is  good  ;{t)  such  impossibility  cannot,  however,  be  shewn  by 

(l)  Anon.,  12  Mod.  232.     Jcnnhig's  case,  5  Mod.  423,  521. 

[m]  London  (Citv)  v.  Estwick,  Sty.  32.     Braithwaite's  case,  1  Vent.  19. 

in)  U.  V.  Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  723,  appoved  in  2  T.  R.  181.  R.  r.  Tappenden, 
3  East,  188;  8  T.  R.  353.  R.  v.  Prin,  1  Keb.  594,  595,  68G.  See  post,  "Invali- 
dating Return." 

[o)  Ante,  p.  288,  n.  (/r).  R.  v.  Bristol  (Maj^or),  1  Show.  288.  S.  C.  nom.  R.  v. 
Rowe,  Carth.  199.     S.  C.  Comb.  145.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (B.) 

(oo)  Ante,  p.  27,  28,  293,  294. 

[p]  See  ante,  p.  194,  195,  n.  (e),  (/).  R.  v.  Bristol  Dock,  2  Q.  B.  G4.t  S.  C.  1 
G.  &  D.  28G.  S.  C.  2  Rail.  Gas.  599.  R.  v.  Buckingham  (Corp.),  10  Mod.  179.  See 
tits.  "Peremptory  Writ,"  "Quashing  Return." 

(.7)  Ante  p.  309,  n.  (t),  319,  u.  (/),  357,  358.  R.  v.  Ouse  Bank  Commissioners,  3 
A.  &  E.  544,  549.  ^        ^    ^ 

(r)  Ante  p.  319,  n.  [r).  R.v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  432,  per  Holt,  C.  J.  S.  G. 
Ld.  Raym.  559.  R.  v.  St.  Andrew  (Parish),  10  A.  &  E.  739.f  R.  v.  Liverpool  (Mayor), 
Burr.  723,  approved  in  T.  R.  181. 

{s)  See  ante,  p.  198  199.  Appleford's  case,  1  Mod.  82.  S,  C.  2  Kcb.  299,  861.  R. 
V.  St.  John's,  4  Mod.  368.  ^,       ^  , 

(0  See  ante,  p.  121,  n.  (r).  R.  v.  Round,  4  A.  t  E.  139.t  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  427.t 
S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  546. 


RETURN,     ETC.  401 

averring  facts  inconsistent  with  the  original  duty,  but  by  denying  the 
suggestion  in  the  writ,  upon  wliich  alone  the  duty  could  be  founded  at 
the  time  when  the  writ  issued. (»)  The  want  of  necessary  or  sufficient 
funds  to  execute  or  carry  out  the  commands  of  a  writ  of  mandamus,  ia 
therefore  in  general  no  answer  to  it.  Thus,  where  the  trustees  of  a  turn- 
pike road  had  formed  a  new  road  through  private  grounds,  but  had  ne- 
glected to  make  proper  fences,  as  required  by  stat.  4  Geo.  4,  c.  95,  s.  66, 
the  want  of  necessary  funds  for  that  purpose  was  held  not  to  constitute  a 
valid  return  ;(v)  and  this  is  also  true,  though  the  duty  which  the  defend- 
ants have  to  discharge,  be  a  public  one,  if  it  do  not  appear  on  return  why 
they  are  without  funds,  or  how  they  have  disposed  of  them.(w) 

If,  however,  the  I'eturn  attempt  to  shew  an  incapacity  to  obey  the 
*writ,  by  reason  of  the  change  of  circumstances,  the  return  must 
shew  that  there  was  no  fraud  or  stratagem  on  the  part  of  the  de-  L         -^ 
fendant.(.r) 

.]     .     Double  or  Several  Returns. — The  rule  of  law  as  to  a 

return  consisting  of  two  or  more  causes  is,  that  '■'  wherever  there  is  a  man- 
damus directed  to  a  party  to  do  some  act,  or  to  return  some  cause  to  the 
contrary,  it  is  competent  to  that  person  to  return  as  many  causes  to  the 
whole  of  the  writ,  or  to  distinct  portions  of  it,  as  he  pleases,  provided  they 
are  not  inconsistent  with  each  other;  and  that  if  one  of  them  only  be 
sufficient  no  peremptory  mandamus  will  be  awarded,  for  utile  per  inutile 
non  vitiatur."(7/)  Therefore,  in  order  to  support  a  return  consisting  of 
several  returns,  it  is  not  necessary  that  every  one  of  them  should  be  good 
but  it  is  sufficient  if  one  be  good,  provided  the  whole  of  them  are  neither 
repugnant  nor  inconsistent.(s)  So  that  if  the  return  consist  of  several 
independent  matters  not  inconsistent  with  each  other,  but  part  of  them 
are  good  in  law,  and  part  bad,  the  Court  may,  and  will  quash  the  return 

(m)  See  ante,  p.  109,  n.  (r),  224,  n.  (m),  [n).  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10 
A.  &  E.  531,  557,  561.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.  S.  C.  1  Rail.  Cas.  509,  cited  in  R  v. 
Birmingham  Railway,  2  Q.  B.  58.f     S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  324. 

(«)  See  ante,  p.  109,  n.  (r),  131,  n.  [p)  224,  n.  (?«),  [n).  R.  v.  Luton  Roads, 
(Trustees),  1  Q.  B.  Beo.f  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  248.  See  tit.  "  Courts  Inferior"  (Hold- 
ing.) 

(ir)  1  G.  &  D.  247,  per  Ld.  Denman,  C.  J.,  supra,  n.  [v).  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties 
Railway,  4  P.  &  D.  46.  S.  C.  10  A.  &  E.  531,  557.t  n.  (b).  S.  C.  1  Rail.  Cas.  509. 
See  ante,  tit.  "  Railway"  (Duties,  &c.,  Return). 

(x)  Willock  on  Corporations,  406.     And  see  R.  v.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  405. | 

[y]  Bull.  N.  P.  201.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (I.)  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  & 
Ad.  271.t  S.  C.  2  N.  &  M.  130  ;f  1  N.  &  M.  285.1  Wright  v.  Fawcett,  Burr.  2041 ; 
Cowp.  413.  Green  v.  Durham  (Mayor),  Burr.  127.  Ward  v.  Newcastle  (Mayor), 
cited  in  Burr.  2044,  per  Yates,  J.  R.  v.  Norwich  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  1244.  S. 
C.  Holt,  444.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  436,  n.  (a).  R.v.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  67,  68,  where 
see  form  of  several  returns.  R.  v.  Old  Hall  (Manor),no  A.  &  E.  248-1  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D. 
518.  R.  V.  North  Midland  Railway,' 11  A.  &  E.  955.1  S.  0.  3  P.  &  D.  622.  S.  C. 
W.  W.  &  D.  650.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  3.  R.  v.  New  Windsor  (Mayor),  7  Q.  B. 
9l7.t     S.  0.  14L.  J.,  N.  S.319,  Q.  B. 

(z)  R.  V.  York  (Archbp.),  6  T.  R.  493,  cited  in  R.  v.  Kendall,  4  P.  &  D.  618.  S-. 
C.  1  Q.  B.  366.f  R.  V.  Brancaster  (Churchwardens),  7  A.  &  E.  459.1  S.  C.  2  N 
&  P.  580. 

June,  1852.— 26 


402  tapping's    mandamus. 

as  to  such  part  only  as  is  bad,  and  in  its  discretion  put  the  prosecutor  to 
plead  to  or  traverse  the  rest,  (a) 

The  following  matters  of  return  have  been  allowed  to  be  returned 
together,  as  not  -being  cither  inconsistent  or  repugnant.  Thus  there 
is  neither  inconsistence  nor  repugnance  in  stating  first,  "  non  debito 
modo  electus/'  and  secondly,  "  that  a  tribunal  authorized  to  decide  upon 
the  election,  had  adjudged  such  election  to  be  void."(i)  So  where  the 
right  of  election  of  an  alderman  is,  by  custom,  in  the  citizens,  but  the 
Court  of  Aldermen  has  the  power  of  rejecting  the  party  returned  to 
them  as  elected,  it  is  not  inconsistent  to  return  to  a  mandamus  to  ad- 
mit to  tlie  office  of  alderman,  that  the  prosecutor  '*  was  elected  by  the 
r*Rfin  *citizens  according  to  the  custom,  but  was  rejected  by  the  Court  of 
'-  Aldermen,  and  so  was  not  duly  elected. "(c)     So  to  a  mandamus 

to  be  sworn  and  admitted  into  the  office  of  freeman,  returns  that  "  the 
prosecu.tor  was  not  elected,"  and  ''  that  he  was  not  approved  by  the  lord 
of  the  manor,"  have  been  held  to  be  consistent. ((^)  So  returns  that  "the 
prosecutor  was  not  duly  elected  sexton  according  to  the  ancient  custom  of 
the  parish,"  and  also,  "  that  there  was  a  custom  for  the  churchwardens 
and  inhabitants  to  remove  at  pleasure,  and  that  the  prosecutor  was  re- 
moved pursuant  to  such  custom,"  have  been  held  to  be  consistent. (e)  So 
to  a  mandamus  to  the  lord  of  a  manor  to  hear  a  plaint,  a  return  "  that  in 
1835  the  plaint  was  set  aside  and  annulled  for  certain  errors,  and  that 
afterwards,  in  1838,  in  obedience  to  the  writ,  the  defendants  heard  the 
plaint  again,  when  for  ihe  same  errors,  and  for  others,  it  was  adjudged 
that  the  plaint  had  been  rightly  set  aside  in  1835,  so  that  they  could  not 
take  further  cognizance  of  the  plaint,"  has  been  held  not  to  be  repugnant; 
because  they  stated  both  that  the  plaint  had  been  proceeded  with  in  obe- 
dience to  the  writ,  and  that  it  could  not  be  so  proceeded  with.(/)  So 
returns  "  that  A.  was  not  a  burgess,"  "  that  he  was  not  eligible  to  the  office 
of  common  councilman,"  and  "  that  he  was  not  elected,"  have  been  held 
not  to  be  inconsistent  causes  to  a  writ  to  admit  to  the  office  of  common 
councilman.  ((/) 

As  before  stated, (A)  the  inconsistency  or  repugnance  of  returns  is  a 

la)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  456,  461.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  4  M.  k  R. 
53.  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  9  B.  &  C.  1,  20. f  R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  66;  Com. 
Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3,  5  ;  Vin.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  R.;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (L)  R. 
V.  York  (Archbp.),  6  T.  R.  493.     See  post,  tit.  "Pleas,"  &c. 

(6)  R.  T.  London  (Mayor),  9  B.  &  C.  26.}  S.  C.  4  M.  &  R.  36,  59.  R.  v.  London 
(Mayor)  5  B.  &  Ad.  233,  241.f  R.  London  (Mayor),  2  N.  &  M.  126,  130.  See  ante, 
tit.  "Office"  (Election). 

(c)  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  2  N.  &  M.  126,|  where  see  a  form  of  return. 

\d)  Wright  V.  Fawcett,  Burr.  2041.  R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  71.  R.  v.  Nor- 
Tvich  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  436,  n.  (a). 

[e)  See  ante,  p.  258,  n.  (a).  R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  11.  R.  t.  Taunton 
(Churchwdns.),  Cowp.  413.  Wright  v.  Fawcett,  Burr.  2040  ;  2  Salk.  436,  n.  (a). 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3. 

(/)  R.  V.  Old  Hall  (Manor),  2  P.  &  D.  515.     S.  C.  10  A.  &  E.  256.1 

{(/)  See  ante,  p.  100,  n.  (?«).  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  456,  where  see 
form  of  return.     Ccm.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3. 

(A)  See  ante,  p.  360,  n.  (y),  (2). 


RETURN,     ETC.  403 

fatal  defect ;(/)  for  as  on  a  declaration,  in  which  two  inconsistent  counts 
are  joined,  the  plaintiff  caunot  have  judgment  -.{J)  so  on  a  mandamus 
where  the  causes  returned  are  either  inconsistent  or  repugnant,  the  whole 
return  is  bad,  and  the  Court  will,  on  motion,  quash  it,  and  award  a  peremptory 
writ,(/),  and  so  put  the  defendant,  in  the  case  of  an  *ofBce,  to  |-^2621 
bring  a  quo  warranto  :{l)  notwithstanding  one  of  the  inconsistent 
causes  Avould  have  been  good,  if  it  had  been  returned  by  itself;  for  by 
being  connected  with  anuther,  it  is  made  repugnant  and  contradictory, 
which  raises  an  objection  to  the  whole  return,  for  the  Court  cannot  know 
upon  which  part  of  it  to  rely.(?yt). 

The  following  matters  of  return  have  been  adjudged  to  be  inconsistent 
and  repugnant,  and  the  returns  in  which  they  were  joined  have  been 
quashed.  Thus  a  return  ''that  D.  w^as  elected,"  which  ended  by  stating 
''  that  he  was  not  elected,"  was  quashed  for  inconsistency,  as  it  was  im- 
possible to  i-econcile  those  statements.(n)'  So  a  return  "  that  the  prosecu- 
tor was  duly  elected,"  "  that  he  was  removed  for  non-attendance,"  and 
"that  his  election  was  void,  he  not  having  taken  the  Sacrament,"  has 
been  quashed  for  repugnaucy.(o)  So  it  has  been  held  to  be  inconsistent 
to  state  in  a  return  "  that  the  corporation  were  not  duly  assembled  on  the 
15th  January,"  and  afterwards  to  state  "  the  election  of  another  corpor- 
ate officer,  to  wit,  on  the  15th  Januari/,"  the  day,  in  such  case,  being 
material. (jj)  So  the  joinder  of  several  inconsistent  matters  of  returns, 
as  misbehaviour,  bribery,  and  not  elected,  (  q)  have  invalidated  a  return. 

If,  however,  the  inconsistency  or  repugnancy  be  in  matter  of  mere  sur- 
plusage, the  return  will  not  thereby  be  vitiated. (r)  Thus,  if  in  one  part, 
a  return  be  "  quod  fuit  amotus  21  Aug.,'  and  in  another  part  "  that  he 

(i)  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  9  B.  &  C.  l.f  S.  C.  4  M.  &  R.  3G.  R.  v.  Norwich 
(Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  1244.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  436.  S.  C.  Holt,  444.  R.  v.  Old  Hall  (Ma- 
nor), 2  P.  &  D.  517.  S.  C.  10  A.  &  E.  256-1  As  to  what  is  a  sufficient  allegation 
of  an  inconsistent  fact  to  avoid  return,  see  2  T.  R.  460,  461. 

(/)  2  T.  R.  461,  per  Buller,  J. 

[k)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (Mayor)  2  T.  R.  456,  461.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  4  M.  & 
R.  53.  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  66.  Vid.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3,  5 ;  Vin. 
Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  R. ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (L)  On  the  motion,  objections  may  be 
taken  to  the  several  causes  for  inconsistency,  and  to  the  causes  individually  for 
other  defects;  5  T.  R.  66,  supra. 

(l)  Wright  V.  Fawcett,  Burr.  2041.     R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  459. 

(m)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  456 ;  Ld.  Raym.  1244.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  436. 
R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  66.  R.  v.  Taunton  (Churchwardens),  Cowp.  413. 
Wright  V.  Fawcett,  Burr.  2041.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  181,  n.  F. 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3. 

(h)  R.  v.  Norwich  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  436,  17.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1244.  S.  C.  Holt, 
444.  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  9  B.  &  C.  20.t  S.  C.  4  M.  &  R.  36,  59.  See  2  T.  R. 
459,  supra,  n.    [m). 

(o)  R.  V.  Pomfret  (Mayor),  10  Mod.  107.     See  ante,  p.  55,  n.  {</). 

(p)  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  66. 

(,?)  2  Salk.  436.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1244.  S.  C.  Holt,  444,  supra,  n.  (n).  Com, 
Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  5.  R.  v.  Kendall,  4  P.  &  D.  616.  S.  C.  1  Q.B.  3G6.f  And  see 
5  T.  R.  66,  and  4  D.  &  R.  330.t     S.  C.  2  B.  &  C.  764-1 

()•)  Ld.  Hawley's  case,  1  Vent.  144.  S.  0.  2  Keb.  770,  796.  R.  v.  Coventry 
(Mayor),  2  Salk.  430.  S.  C-  Ld.  Raym.  391.  Bernardston's  case,  1  Vent.  145.  R.  y. 
Durham  (Corp.),  10  Mod.  146. 


404  tapping's    mandamus. 

continued  in  office  until  the  25tL  December,"  which  is  contradictory,  yet 
the  return  is  good,  because  the  contradiction  exists ;  in  that  which  is  mere 
surplusage,  (s) 

.]     3rd.  Return  in  nature  of  a  Demurrer  to  the  Writ. — As  the 


defendant  cannot  demur  to  the  writ,  so  he  may,  by  his  return,  submit 
that  he  is  not  bound  by  law  to  execute  it,  which  submission  being  in  the 
P^qpo-i  *nature  of  a  demurrer,  should  be  treated  accordingly;  that  is,  a 
concilium  obtained,  and  the  point  argued. ((') 

.]      EnyrossiiKj. — The  draft  return  having  been  obtained  from 

counsel  carefully  drawn  and  settled,  should  be  engrossed  by  the  defen- 
dant's attorney  on  parchment  for  filing.  If  the  return  be  short,  it  may 
be  engrossed  on  the  back  of  the  writ,  or  a  copy,  as  the  case  may  be,  in 
the  same  manner  as  a  return  of  "  non  est  inventus,"  in  the  ordinary  case 
of  a  writ  of  execution ;  or  it  may,  according  to  the  almost  invariable  prac- 
tice, especially  if  the  return  be  of  any  length,  be  engrossed  upon  a  sepa- 
rate parchment,  to  which  the  writ  or  copy,  as  the  case  may  be,(ii)  should 
be  annexed,  it  having  been  endorsed  with  a  minute  or  memorandum,  that 
the  schedule  or  parchment  annexed  to  such  writ,  constitutes  and  is  the 
return. (y)  The  form  of  the  indorsement  may  be  as  follows :  "  The  exe- 
cution of  this  writ  appears  hy  the  Schedule  hereto  annexed.  The  answer 
of  A.  B.,  <fcc.,  &€." 

.]     Signing  and  Sealing. — When  the   return  is  engi'ossed,  it  is 

usual,  if  it  be  made  by  a  private  person,  or  corporation  sole,  to  sign  his 
name  at  the  foot  of  it,  although  it  seems  that  in  principle,  such  signature 
is  not  necessary,  for  when  the  return  is  filed,  it  becomes  a  record,  and 
cannot  be  averred  against,  and  the  parties  in  whose  names  it  is  made,  are 
thereby  estopped  from  saying  it  is  not  their  return ;  but  if  any  other  ille- 
gally have  made  it,  an  action  on  the  case  lies  against  him  for  having  so 
done.(tt')  It  has,  however,  been  held  in  one  case,  that  where  the  writ  is 
directed  to  a  person  by  his  personal  name,  and  not  by  his  official  one,  he, 
in  such  case,  should  sign  it,  or  show  by  indorsement  or  otherwise,  that  it 
is  his  return.  Thus  where  a  writ  of  mandamus  was  directed,  ''  Johanni 
Groar  Prsesidi,  Sociis  et  Scholaribus,  &c.  Scti.  Johannis  Baptistae."  It 
was  held,  that  although  the  common  seal  was  not  necessary  to  such  a  re- 
turn, yet  as  it  was  particularly  directed  to  "John  Goar,"  he  should  have 
signed  it ;  but  it  was  also  held,  that  the  indorsement  thereon  of  the  name 

is)  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3  ;  1  Vent.  144.     S.  C.  2  Keb.  T70,  supra,  n.  (r). 

\t)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras  (Trustees),  6  A.  &  E.  SlG.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  507,t  where 
see  form  of  return.  R.  v.  "Williams,  8  B.  &  C.  683. f  S.  C.  3  M.  &  R.405,  and  cases 
there  cited.  See  tit.  "  Demurrer,"  post.  R.  v.  St.  Saviour's  Parish,  7  A.  &  E.  925. -j- 
S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  26.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  406,t  where  also  see  a  form  of  such  a  return. 
See  post,  tit.  "  Immediate  Returns." 

(m)  See  ante,  p.  330,  n.  {k),  331,  n.  [q). 

(v)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  184. 

\w)  Ante,  p.  342,  n.  (o),  n.  [p).  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Skin.  368.  R.  v.  Wigan 
(Mayor),  Burr.  1645.     See  tit.  "  Action  and  Information  for  False  Return." 


RETURN,     ETC. 


405 


of  tlie  person  making  it  thus  :  "  Resposio  Johannis  Goar/'  &<?.  (according 
to  the  direction  of  the  writ,)  was  sufficient. (a:-) 

*"\Vhere  the  return  is  that  of  a  corporate  body  it  is  clearly  set-  n^^oa^i 
tied,  that  it  need  be  neither  signed,  nor  under  the  common  seal^  •- 
for  the  reason  above  stated,  that  as  the  filing  makes  it  a  record,  it  is  good 
without,  and  cannot  be  averred  against.(?/)  The  precedents  of  the  returns 
of  municipal  corporations  are  diverse,  although  the  greater  part  of  them 
are  under  the  hand  and  seal  of  the  mayor  only  •,{z)  the  name  being  merely 
that  of  the  office,  and  not  the  Christian  or  surname  of  the  officer.(a)  As 
a  municipal  corporation,  in  whose  name  the  return  is  made,  is  estopped 
from  disavowing  it,  although  made  by  the  mayor  alone,  so  an  action,  if 
the  return  be  false,  may  be  brought  against  either  the  whole  body  or  the 
person  who  procured  it. (6)  The  mayor,  &c.,  is  also  liable  to  such  action 
for  a  false  return,  in  his  private  capacity,  and  evidence  that  the  writ  was 
delivered  to  him,  and  that  there  is  a  return  made,(c)  is  sufficient  to  sup- 
port it. 

.]     Swearing  to  Return. — Previously  to   the  passing  of  stat.  9 

Ann.  c.  20,  it  was  usual,  in  many  cases  for  the  Court  to  require  that  the 
writ  should  be  returned  upon  oath,  and  on  default,  to  grant  a  peremptory 
writ;(f7)  but  as  by  that  statute  the  prosecutor  may  traverse  the  return, 
and  is  not,  therefore,  driven  to  his  action,  or  information,  for  a  false  re- 
turn ;  so,  since  the  passing  of  such  statute,  the  uniform  practice  has  been, 
that  such  return  need  not  be  sworn, (e)  unless  the  Court,  by  order,  so 
direct ;(/)  which  it  will  not  do  as  of  course,(r/)  or  upon  the  asser-  r^ocK-i 
tion  *by  the  prosecutor  that  it  is  false ;(/?)  but  if  the  Court  itself^ 
suspects  it  to  be  false,  it  will,  in  its  discretion,  order  it  to  be  sworn  to.(0 

{x)  R.  T.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Skin.  .368.     See  ante,  317,  n.  {w). 

(y)  Powell  V.  Price,  Comb.  41,  citing  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  93  b.  R.  v.  Glouces- 
ter (Mayor),  2  Show.  504.  Lidleston  v.  Exeter  (Mayor),  Comb.  422.  S.  C.  12 
Mod.  126.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  223.  R.  v.  Chalice,  Ld.  Raym.  848,  S.  P.  R.  v. 
Exeter  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  223.  R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Comb.  279.  Thetford's 
case,  1  Salk.  192,  4.  S.  C.  Holt,  171.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  103,  4;  and  see  Skin.  368, 
and  Burr.  1644,  supra;  1  Leon.  184.  Arundel  v.  Arundel,  Yelv.  34;  Com.  Dig. 
tit.  "  Man."  D.  2.  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Borough),  12  Mod.  308,  401 ;  but  see  Morgan 
V.  Carmarthen  (Corp.),  3  Keb.  350.  See  form  of  return  by  City  of  London,  2  N.  & 
M.  126  ;f  Bull.  N.  P.  205  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (L.)     Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  184. 

Before  the  Statute  of  York  sheriffs  were  not  required  to  set  their  hands  to  re- 
turns. 

(z)  Powell  V.  Price,  Comb.  41.  Thetford's  case,  1  Salk.  192,  4.  S.  C.  3  Salk. 
103,  4.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  848.     S.  C.  Holt,  l7l. 

(a)  R.  V.  Colchester  (Mayor),  Comb.  324.     See  ante,  p.  317,  n.  [tv). 

h)  Ante,  p.  341,  n.  (J),  342,  n.  (o)  ;  12  Mod.  126,  supra,  n.  (y). 

(c)  Ante,  p.  342  (p),  344,  (6);  1  Salk.  192,  4.  S.  C.  3  Salk.  103,  4  ;  Skin.  368. 
See  post,  tit.  "  Action  and  Information  for  False  Return." 

(d)  Jay's  case,  3  Keb.  714.  S.  C.  1  Vent.  302,  per  Hale,  C.  J.,  citing  Medlicott's 
case,  Manaton's  case,  Raym.  365  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  2. 

(e)  Anon.,  1  Sid.  257  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (D.  2). 

(/)  R.  V.  Oxford  (Mayor),  Palmer,  455.  S.  C.  Latch.  229.  S.  C.  Noy,  92,  citing 
Jlayor  of  Coventry's  case,  also  cited  in  Awdley's  case.  Latch.  124.  S.  C.  Poph. 
176.     S.  C.  Noy.  98. 

(ff)  Burgess  of  Devises'  case,  2  Keb.  725.      Awdley's  case,  Latch.  124,  pi.  117. 

\h)  Anon.,  1  Sid.  257,  although  a  precedent.  Latch.  123,  was  quoted. 

(i)  Manaton's  case,  Raym.  365,  366. 


406  tapping's    biandamus. 

-.]     Filing  Return;  Necessitij  of  Filing. — The  return,  when  en- 


grossed and  completed, (_/)  must  be  taken,  together  with  the  writ,  to  the 
Crown  Officc,(/.-)  and  be  there  filed ;(/)  for  until  it  is  so  filed,  it  is  not,  in 
law,  a  return. (?/) 

In  general  every  return  is  ambulator}',  and  in  the  breast  of  him  or 
them  whose  return  it  is,  until  it  shall  be  filed  •,{m)  but  after  it  is  filed,  it 
becomes  a  record,  and  cannot  be  altered  nor  amended,  without  a  rule  of 
Court  for  that  purpose  having  been  previously  obtained,  which  the  Court 
is  very  disinclined  to  grant  ;(?i)  notwithstanding  the  application  be  made 
durino-  the  same  Term  in  which  the  return  came  in,  for  although  the 
acts  of  the  Court  remain  in  the  breast  of  the  Court,  during  the  same 
Term,  yet  such  rule  does  not  apply  to  returns  which  are  the  acts  of 
others. (o) 

.]      Wlien  to  he  Filed. — The  return  should,  unless  time  for  that 

purpose  have  been  previously  obtained,(p)  be  filed  according  to  the  exi- 
gency of  the  writ,  that  is,  on  or  before  the  return  day  thereof  ^(g')  or  if 
further  time  have  been  obtained, (r)  then  on  or  before  its  expiration.  But 
it  seems  that  a  return  cannot  regularly  be  filed  after  the  death  of  him 
whose  return  it  is ;  if  so,  such  proceeding  is  irregular,(.s-)  for  as  before 
stated,  until  a  return  is  filed,  it  is  ambulatory,  although  signed,  for  that 
is  neither  necessary  nor  material;  so  that  if  a  defendant  should  die  imme- 
diately after  signing  a  return,  and  before  filing  it,  the  Court  would,  if 
necessary,  direct  an  issue  to  try  the  validity  of  it.(/) 

If  the  return  be  not  duly  filed,  either  on  or  before  the  return  day  of 
the  writ,  or  on  or  before  such  other  further  day  as  the  Court  may  have 
^^p-.  allowed  ;(h)  an  attachment  maybe  obtained  for  the  contempt  of 
*-  *Court  in  not  obeying  the  writ  or  rule,  as  the  case  may  be,(w)  and 

this  appears  to  be  the  only  remedy  the  prosecutor  has,  inasmuch  as  the 
mere  fact  of  the  return  having  been  filed  too  late  is  not  a  ground  for 
quashing  it,  for  when  once  on  the  file,  the  Court  will  allow  it  to  stand. (z(;) 

The  Court  has  in  various  instances  imposed  fines  upon  defendants  who 

(./)  Crown  Off.  Rules,  r.  11,  App.  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  184.  See  ante,  p.  331,  334, 
345,  n.  (A;),  as  to  filing  the  writ. 

(k)  King's  Bench  Walk,  Temple.     R.  v.  Hoskins,  Cas.  temp.  Hard.  188. 

(/)  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  431,  9.  S.  C.  Holt,  440.  S.  C.  Garth. 
500. 

ill)  R.  V.  Wigan  (Mayor),  Burr.  1641,  1646.     See  supra,  n.  {j). 

\m)  R.  V.  Holmes,  Burr.  1644,  per  Wilmot,  J.     See  supra,  n.  \ll). 

(n)  London  (City)  v.  Estwick,  Styles,  33,  35,  and  per  Roll  (J.)  No  record  was 
ever  amended  after  filing  before  the  time  of  Hen.  1. 

(o)  Sty.  33,  35,  supra,  n.  («).  (7;)  Ante,  p.  6,  344,  n.(c),  {d),  (/). 

(q)  Ante,  p.  6,  344,  n.  [ff).     Cr.  Ofi".  R.  r.  11,  App. 

lr\  Ante  p.  344  n.  (f). 

(s)  R.  V.  Holmes',  Burr.  1641  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  2. 

(t)  R.  V.  Wigan  (Mayor),  Burr.  1641-1646,  supra,  n.  (w). 

(m)  Ante,  p.  6,  n.  (0),  344,  n.  (/). 

(v)  Ante,  p.  6,  u.  (o),  344,  n.  (/").     See  post,  tit.  "Attachment." 

{w)  R.  V.  Kendall,  1  Q.  B.  3l4.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  603.  S.  G.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
137,  Q.  B. 


RETURN,     ETC.  407 

have  improperly  delayed  filing  tlieir  returns.  Thus,  because  a  college 
had  delayed  and  trifled  with  the  Court  of  B.  R.,  by  contemptuously 
neglecting  to  make  a  return,  such  Court  granted  an  alias  writ,  returnable 
within  a  week,  under  a  penalty  of  100/.(ic)  So  the  Court  has  fined  a 
mayor  51.  for  contemptuously  refusing  to  make  a  return,  and  likewise 
granted  an  attachment  against  him.(^)  A  bishop  of  Durham  was  also, 
temp.  Edw.  3,  fined  2000?.  for  the  same  cause.(^;) 

.]  IIoiv  filed. — Formerly,  in  order  to  file  a  return,  it  was  neces- 
sary by  motion  to  obtain  a  rule  of  Court  for  leave  so  to  do,(a)  but  now 
such  motion  is  unnecessary  by  reason  of  Rule  14  of  the  Crown  Office 
Kules,  which  states  that  it  shall  not  thenceforth  be  necessary  to  make 
any  motion  to  file  any  writ  or  other  jn'oceedmr/  returned  into  the  Court  of 
B.  R.,  but  that  the  same  shall  be  filed  at  the  Crown  Office,  without  any 
rule  having  been  first  granted  for  that  purpose.  It  is  therefore  only 
necessary  to  take  it  to  the  Crown  Office,  and  leave  it  with  the  proper 
officer  there. (Z<) 

.]     Staying  filing. — Formerly,  when  the  consent  of  the  Court  to 

file  a  return  was  necessary,  it  was  the  practice  for  the  prosecutor,  or  of 
those  who  of  right  should  have  joined  in  the  return,  if  he  or  they  had 
grounds  for  such  an  application,  to  apply  to  the  Court  on  motion  to  stay 
the  filing  thereof  j(c)  Taut,  it  is  apprehended,  that  as  the  filing  is  now  a 
matter  of  course  without  rule,(f?)  and  as  the  prosecutor  may,  for  just 
cause,  obtain  a  rule  to  take  the  return  off  the  file,(e)  such  motion  and 
practice  has  become  obsolete. 

* .]     Taking  off  File. — The  Court  has  the  power  to  and  r^ggj-i 

will,  if  a  return  be  improperly  on  the  file,  upon  motion  for  that 
purpose  made,  order  it  to  be  taken  off  the  file,  which  is  tantamount  to 
quashing  it;(/)  such  power  is,  however,  sparingly  exercised.  Thus  where 
a  return  was  scandalous,  the  Court  would  not  allow  it  to  be  taken  off  the 
file,  even  with  consent,  but,  under  the  special  circumstances  of  the  case, 
allowed  the  return  to  be  dashed  through  in  the  manner  of  a  cancella- 
tion. (^)     So  the  Court  has  refused  to  order  a  return  to  be  taken  off  the 


t 


(x)  Dr.  Witherington's  case,  1  Keb.   50.     S.  C.  1  Lev.  23.     S.  C.  1  Sid.  71. 
\y)  R.  V.  Oxford  (Mayor),  Latch.  229.     S.  C.  Palm.  455. 
(z)  Anon.,  1  Keb.  101. 
\a)  R.  V.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  431,  9 ;  Burr.  1641.     Dr.  Witherington's 
case,  1  Keb.  79.     London  (City)  v.  Estwick,  Sty.  33  ;  Comb.  289. 
(6)  See  Cr.  Off.  R.,  App.  r.  14.     See  ante,  p.  344.  n.  {g),  365,  n.  {k). 

(c)  Bull.  N.  P.  205.  R.  T.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  Carth.  500.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  431,  9. 
S.  C.  12  Mod.  308.     S.  C.  Holt,  440.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  559. 

(d)  See  supra,  n.  (6);  Cr.  Off.  R.  r.  14.  "  It  shall  not  henceforth  be  necessary 
to  make  any  motion  to  file  any  writ  or  other  proceeding  returned  into  the  said 
Court,  but  the  same  shall  be  filed  at  the  Crown  OfiSce,  without  any  rule  first 
granted  for  that  purpose." 

(e)  See  ante,  p.  365,  and  infra,  p.  367,  n.  (/),  [g),  (h). 

If)  R.  T.  Holmes,  Burr.  1641.  R.  v.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  403.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
524.1  R.  V.  Payn,  3  P.  &  D.  625.  S.  C.  11  A.  &  E.  955-1  R.  v.  Poole  (Mayor),  9 
L.  J.,  N.  S.  231,  Q.  B. 

(g)  Dr.  Widdrington's  case,  Raym.  68,  69.  S.  C.  1  Keb.  458.  Dr.  Patrick's  case, 
1  Lev.  67  ;  but  see  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  1379,  1389.     S.  C.  1  W.  Blac.  300,  352, 


408  tapping's    mandamus. 

files  of  tlic  Court  on  account,  as  disclosed  by  affidavits,  of  it  being  a  con- 
tempt of  Court. C/<) 

.]      Wilhdrawing  Return. — A  return  to  a  mandamus  may,  it  seems, 

be  withdrawn  by  leave  of  the  Court.  (Q 

.]     Disavowincj  Return. — In  many  cases  it  occurs  that  the  return 

of  one,  or  of  a  majority,  is  in  law  deemed  to  be  the  return  of  others,  or  of 
that  artificial  person  or  corporation  of  which  such  one  is  the  head,  or  of 
which  such  majority  is  the  major  part.  Thus  a  mandamus  to  a  municipal 
corporation  must,  as  before  stated, (7')  be  returned  by  the  mayor,  and  his 
return  will  be  taken  to  be  the  return  of  the  corporate  body.  If,  however, 
the  major  part  thereof  disagree  to  such  return,  as  being  false  in  fact,  or 
contrary  to  their  intention,  &c.,  they  may  obtain  a  criminal  information 
against  the  mayor,  but  cannot  disavow  it.(A-)  Thus,  if  a  writ  of  manda- 
mus be  directed  to  several,  as  to  the  "  mayor,  bailiffs,  &c.,"  and  the  mayor 
alone,  who  is  the  most  principal  and  proper  person,  returns  and  brings  in 
the  writ,  the  Court  will  not,  upon  affidavits,  examine  whether  such  return 
had  the  consent  of  the  majority,  but  will  take  the  return  and  leave  such 
majority  to  punish  the  mayor  for  such  misdemeanor,  and  to  that  end  will 
grant  leave  to  file  criminal  information  against  him.(/)  But  if  the  ma- 
jority of  such  a  corporation  make  a  return  in  the  name  of  the  mayor,  with- 
r*^rsi  °^*  ^^^  *consent,  he  may  come  to  the  Court  within  the  same  term 
^  in  which  it  is  filed  and  disavow  it,  but  after  that  term  the  Court 

will  assume  it  to  be  his  return. (m)  So  if  the  mandamus  be  directed  to  a 
single  officer,  as  a  sheriff,  and  a  return  be  made  by  a  stranger  without  his 
privity,  he  may  and  should  come  and  disavow  it.(?i) 

It  is  necessary,  as  before  stated,  to  the  validity  of  a  return  that  it  be 
filed,  for  after  it  is  so  filed  it  becomes  a  record,  and  can  neither  be  im- 
peached or  disavowed. (o)  Therefore,  when  it  is  wished  to  disavow  a 
return,  a  motion  should,  by  counsel,  be  made  to  the  Court  of  Queen's 
Bench  for  leave  "  to  stay  the  filing  of  it,"  and  upon  a  proper  case  for  disa- 
vowal being  made,  the  Court  will  so  stay  it.(jj) 

The  application,  as  shewn  by  the  cases,  may  be  made  at  any  time  during 

where  the  return  was  by  consent  withdrawn,  and  a  peremptory  mandamus 
awarded. 

(h)  R.  V.  Payn,  3  N.  &  P.  165.  S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  392,  402.t  S.  C.  1  W.  W.  &  H. 
99,  105.     S.  C.  2  Jur.  47. 

[i]  R.  V.  Barker,  Burr.  13T9.     S.  C.    1  W.  Blac.  300,  352  ;  but  see  supra,  n. 

(/),  {9)- 

(j)  See  ante,  p.  342,  n.  (o). 

{k)  See  ante,  p.  342,  n.  (0).  R.  v.  Bath  (Mayor),  6  Mod.  152.  See  also  R.  t.  Mon- 
day, Cowp.  538. 

(l)  R.  V.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  431.  S.  C.  Holt,  440.  R.  v.  Hoskins,  Cas. 
temp.  Hard.  188.  Powell  v.  Price,  Comb.  41,  213,  but  see  ante,  p.  342,  and  the 
case  of  Abingdon  Town,  Carth.  499,  500,  where  a  return  by  the  mayor  alone  to  a 
writ,  directed  to  the  whole  corporation,  was  on  debate  held  to  be  bad.  Bac.  Abr. 
tit.  "  Man."  (G.)     See  post.  tit.  "  Action,  &c.,  for  false  Return." 

(m)  R.  V.  Chapman,  6  Mod.  152.     S.  C.  Holt,  443.     See  ante,  p.  324,  n.  (;«). 

(n)  Anon.,  Dyer,  182  b,  E.  T.  2  Eliz.     R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  Holt,  440. 

(0)  Ante,  p.  3G5,  n.  (ll).     R.  v.  Wigan  (Mayor),  Burr.  1G41,  164G. 

(p)  See  ante,  p.  366,  n.  (c).  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  431.  S.  C.  Holt, 
440,  supra,  n.  (0). 


RETURN,     ETC.  409 

tliat  Term  ia  wliicli  the  writ  is  returned,  but  not  after. (2-)  The  Court,  if 
they  grant  the  rule,  will  not,  by  such  disavowal,  allow  the  prosecutor  to 
be  prejudiced,  but  will  impose  terms  on  the  disavowments,  such  as  by  com- 
manding them  to  put  in  a  return  by  a  limited  time.  Indeed  the  disavow- 
ants  usually  pray,  as  a  part  of  their  rule,  that  they  may  be  at  liberty  to 
file  another  return,  &c.[r) 

.]     Amendment  of  Return. — At  common  law  a  return  was  not 

allowed  to  be  amended  after  it  had  been  filed,  not  even  in  matter  of  mere 
form.(.s)  In  process  of  time,  however,  this  strict  rule  became  somewhat 
relaxed,  and  a  clerical  mistake  was  allowed  to  be  amended  after  the  Term 
in  which  the  return  was  made  or  filed. (<)  Thus,  a  return  that  one  Far- 
rington,  ^'  non  fuit  electus,  et  perfectus  in  locum  et  officium,  unius  com- 
munis concilii,  ac  un'  alderman'  civitat'  Cicestr',"  was  allowed  to  be 
amended  (because  they  were  several  offices,  and  the  prosecutor  might  have 
been  chosen  to  one  and  not  to  the  other),  by  adding  "velaliquemeorum," 
it  being  only  a  mistake  of  the  clerk  of  the  Crown  Office,  his  instructions 
being  general.  (?*) 

At  a  subsequent  period  the  doctrine  as  to  amending  mistakes  iu 
*a  return,  although  not  reduced  to  any  certain  rule,  was  extended  r;i;opQ-| 
beyond  mere  clerical  errors,  but  in  such  case  was  entirely  a  matter 
for  the  Court's  discretion.  There  is  no  certain  rule,  but  the  principle 
which  governs  the  Court  is,  "  that  an  amendment  shall  or  shall  not  be 
permitted  to  be  made,  as  it  will  best  tend  to  the  furtherance  of  justice. "(v) 
Thus,  the  Court  has  refused  to  permit  the  defendants,  after  verdict  on  a 
traverse  to  a  return  to  a  mandamus,  to  make  amendments  verifying  the 
description  of  the  condition  of  a  borough. (e*?)  But,  on  the  contrary,  a 
mistake  in  a  return  in  setting  forth  a  conviction,  that  the  prosecutor  had 
been  found  guilty  of  the  charges  in  the  third  and  fourth  articles,  without 
having  stated  iu  the  preceding  part  that  the  complaint  consisted  of  four 
articles,  was  allowed  to  be  amended ;  and  this,  although  by  the  recital  of 
the  complaint  in  the  return  it  seemes  rather  to  be  stated  as  containing  only 
two,  and  that  it  did  not  therefore  certainly  appear  that  the  articles  on 
which  the  prosecutor  was  convicted  were  the  same  which  were  set  forth  as 
containing  the  accusations  against  him.(.K) 

[q]  Supra,  n.  {p).       (r)  R.  v.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  431.     S.  C.  Holt,  440. 

(s)  See  ante,  p.  334,  n.  [m).  London  (City)  v.  Eastwick,  Sty.  33.  R.  v.  New  Col- 
lege, 2  Lev.  14.  Coutanclie  v.  Le  Ruez,  1  East,  134 ;  7  T.  R.  704.  See  ante,  tit. 
"  Writ"  (Amendment),  334,  335. 

{t)  See  ante,  p.  334,  (0).  R.  v.  Chichester  (Mayor),  1  Show.  273.  R.  v.  Lyme 
Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  135;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  5.  Dr.  Widdrington's 
case,  1  Lev.  23.  R.  v.  Grampound  (Mayor),  Y  T.  R.  701 ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 
(L.) 

(«)  1  Show.  273,  supra,  n.  [i),  and  see  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  13G, 
n.  (4).     See  ante,  tit.  "Writ"  (Amendment),  p.  334,  345. 

(y)  R.  V.  Grampound  (Mayor),  7  T.  R.  699 ;  1  Doug.  135,  n.  (F.)  R.  v.  Marriott, 
1  D.  &  R.  167.f  R.  T.  Bristol  (Mayor),  1  Show.  288.  S.  C.  Comb.  145.  See  stats. 
4  Ann.  c.  16,  9  Ann.  c.  20. 

[w)  1  Doug.  135,  n.  (F.);  but  see  R.  v.  Armstong,  Andr.  109.  R.  v.  Grampound 
(Mayor),  7  T.  R.  702. 

(.t)  1  Doug.  135,  supra,  n.  [w). 


410  tapping's    mandamus 

If  the  defendant  be  dissatisfied  with,  or  his  return  be  insufficient,  he 
may  apply  to  the  Court,  on  motion,  for  a  rule  to  show  cause  why  it 
should  not  be  amended, (y)  taking  care  to  state  the  particular  amend- 
ments, as  they  should  be  inserted  in  the  rule  nisi. (2)  In  granting  the 
rule,  the  Court  will,  as  such  amendments  are,  as  before  stated,  entirely 
within  the  discretion  of  the  Court,  impose  its  own  terms  on  the  defendant , 
thus,  in  one  case,  an  amendment  was  allowed,  upon  the  defendant  under- 
taking, if  an  action  for  a  false  return  should  be  brought,  to  take  short 
notice  of  trial,  and  not  to  bring  a  writ  of  error  if  there  should  be  judg- 
ment against  thera.(o) 

On  motion  to  quash  the  return  for  being  hypothetical  or  uncertain,  &c., 
the  Court  will  usually  give  leave  to  amend. (?/) 

.]     Invalidatwg  Rtturn. — Having,  in   the    preceding  page.s,   at 

some  length  shewn  the  necessary  constituents  of  a  valid  return,  we  now 
proceed  to  detail  how  far  a  defective  return  may  be  invalidated,  and  to 
premise  some  new  rules  for  construing  a  return,  in  order  tbat  its  legal  suffi- 
ciency may  be  readily  tested. 

In  order  to  ascertain  whether  a  return  be  or  not  a  legal  answer  to  the 
writ,  it  is  unnecessary  to  comment  upon  every  portion  of  it,  or  to  show 
P^o-A-|  *that  every  part  of  it  is  valid,  for  it  is  sufficient  if  on  the  whole 
it  disclose  a  fair  legal  reason  why  the  mandamus  should  not  be 
obeyed  j  therefore,  in  order  to  judge  whether  the  one  be  or  not  an  ade- 
quate answer  to  the  other,  the  allegations  of  the  writ  must  be  looked  at, 
and  the  return  considered  in  relation  with  them.(c)  Thus,  where  a  writ 
suggested  a  due  election  of  the  prosecutor  by  the  persons  entitled  to  elect ; 
a  return  thereto,  which  stated  facts  and  documents  from  which  it  appear- 
ed that  there  was  no  right  in  the  electors,  was  held  to  be  sufficient, 
although  it  did  not  deny  the  right  in  direct  terms. (c?)  The  principle  upon 
which  this  decision  was  founded  is  the  well  acknowledged  one,  that  the 
return  must  ansicer  not  the  icords  only,  hut  the  materiality  of  the  writ; 
therefore,  a  return  which  seems  to  be  guarded  and  not  to  deny  the  sub- 
stance of  the  writ  is  bad.(e)  Again,  where  to  a  writ  directed  to  A.  mayor, 
&c.,  it  was  returned,  that  before  the  writ  was  awarded,  A.  was  removed 
from  his  office  of  mayor,  that  B.  was  elected  thereto  and  then  was  mayor, 

{tj)  R.  v.  Marriott,  1  D.  &  R.  166,f  and  see  11  A.  &  E.  2*7,  28,f  n. 

(z)   1  Doug,  135,  supra,  n.  [10).  (a)  1  Doug.  136,  supra,  n.  {iv). 

(b)  R.  V.  London  Dock,  5  A.  &  E.  163.|  S.  C.  6  N.  &  M.  390.f  See  post,  tit. 
"Invalidating  Return." 

(c)  R.  v.  York  (Archbp.),  6  T.  R.  492,  495,  per  Grose,  J.  R.  v.  Monmouth 
(Major),  4  B.  &  A.  497.1  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  85.  R.  v.  Illchester 
(Bailiffs),  2  B.  &  C.  766.1  S.  C.  4  D.  &  R.  330,1  per  Bayley,  J.  R.  v.  Welbeck 
(Inhabs.),  Stra.  1143.  Com.  Dig.  tit  "  Man."  D.  3.  R.  v.  Dartmouth  (Mayor),  3 
Salk.  229. 

[d)  R.  V.  Kendall,  1  Q.  B.  373.t  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  G02.  See  ante  as  to  the  defect 
of  argumentativeness,  p.  357,  n.  [c). 

[e)  Ante,  p.  348—351.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  85.  R.  v.  York 
(Mayor),  5  T.  R.  70.  R.  v.  Ward  (Dr.),  Fitzg.  195.  R.  v.  Saltash  (Mayor),  Raym. 
432.    S.  C.  Jon.  177. 


RETURN,     ETC.  411 

it  was  held  that  such  a  return  -was  bad,  for  by  a  collusive  resignation  of 
Lis  oflSce  by  A.  the  writ  might  be  evaded. (/) 

The  rule  as  to  the  construction  of  a  return  by  presumption  and  intend- 
ment was  prior  to  the  passing  of  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20, (^)  that  the  return 
must  he  taken  to  he  true  until  falsified  in  an  action  for  a  false  refurn,{h) 
but  such  rule  was  subject  to  an  exception  where  the  matter  of  the  return 
appeared  to  the  Court  to  be  false  as  to  such  facts  of  which  they  were  judi- 
cially cognizant,  or  where  the  return  had  any  patent  defect,  as  repug- 
nancy, &c.((')  At  this  day  however,  by  means  of  those  legislative  enact- 
ments,(y),  which  have  so  closely  assimilated  the  pleadings  incident  to  the 
writ  of  mandamus  to  those  which  obtain  in  personal  actions,  and  left  the 
procedure  by  way  of  action  for  the  false  return,  entirely  at  the  pleasure 
and  discretion  of  the  prosecutor, (/.-)  *the  above  rule  has  become  r*3>j'i-] 
not  only  of  rare  application,  but  other  rules  by  which  the  validity 
of  a  return  may  be  tested  have  been  introduced.  The  first  of  them  is, 
tJiat  no  legal  fact  shall  he  intended  in  a  return  to  a  mandams,  unless  pro- 
perly expressed  therein.{l)  Thus  where  to  a  mandamus  to  restore  to  the 
office  of  clerk  of  the  peace,  it  was  returned  that  the  prosecutor  had  impro- 
perly refused  to  deliver  the  county  rolls  to  the  custos  rotulorum  upon 
request,  that  articles  had  been  exhibited  against  him  in  sessions,  that  he 
had  there  also  refused,  and  that  thereupon  he  was  removed  by  order  of 
the  justices  acccording  to  the  stat.  1  Wm.  &  M.  st.  1,  c.  21,  to  this  re- 
turn  it  was  objected,  that  it  did  not  shew  that  the  articles  were  in  icrit- 
ing,  as  they  should  have  been  agreeably  with  the  above  statute,  and  the 
Court  in  giving  judgment  said,  that  "  nothing  is  to  be  intended  in  a  return 
to  a  mandamus,"  and  as  the  word  "  articles"  did  not  ex  vi  termini  import 
a  writing,{jn)  they  quashed  the  return. 

The  second  rule  is,  that  <'  The  Court  will  not  in  order  to  support  a  re- 
turn, draw  an  inference  if  there  be  no  legal  facts  stated,  from  whence  such 
inference  can  be  deduced."  Thus,  where  to  a  writ  of  mandamus  to  com- 
mand the  defendants  to  certify  +he  election  of  A.  B.  as  recorder,  the  re- 
turn stated,  that  the  mayor  and  sheriifs  of  the  said  city  and  the  major 
part  of  the'  aldermen,  those  who  had  been  sheriffs  and  of  the  common 
council  u-ere  not  duly  assembled  in  the  common  hall  of  the  said  city  to 

(/)  E.  V.  Saltash  (Mayor),  Ray.  431,  365.  S.  C.  Jon.  Ill;  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"  Mau."  D.  4. 

{g)  See  App.,  and  ante,  p.  6,  n.  (q),  (r),  7,  («).  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo. 
2,  c.  12,  App. 

(h)  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  12  Mod.  17.  S.  C.  Skin.  293.  Anon.,  1  Keb.  79.  R. 
V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  159.  Braithwaite's  case,  1  Vent.  19.  R.  v.  Ox- 
ford (Mayor),  Palm.  455.     R.  v.  York  (Archbp.),  6  T.  R.  491. 

(i)  R.  v.  London  City,  Skin.  293. 

(j)  See  ante,  p.  7,  n.  (v),  8,  n.  (a),  (y),  and  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  7,  extended  by 
stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10 
Vict.  c.  113,  App. 

Ik)  Ante,  p.  6,  n.  {q),  (r),  7. 

(l)  R.  T.  Bristol  (Mayor),  1  Show.  288.  R.  v.  Loudon  (City),  Skin.  293.  S.  C. 
12  Mod.  17.  ^   ^ 

(m)  R.  v.  Evans,  1  Show.  822.  S.  C.  Holt,  188.  S.  C.  4  Mod.  31.  S.  C.  12 
Mod.  13.     See  supra,  n.  [l). 


412  tapping's    mandamus. 

proceed  to  tlie  election  of  a  recorder,  for  the  said  city  as  by  the  wi'it  was 
supposed.  The  Court  in  quashing  the  return  held,  that  the  defendants 
should  have  shewn  in  what  particular  they  were  not  assembled  for  the 
purpose  of  electing  a  recorder,  inasmuch  as  they  had  admitted  by  such 
return  that  they  were  assembled,  but  alleged  it  was  for  some  other  pur- 
pose.(«) 

The  third  rule  is,  that,  ^^  if  a  return  contain  legal  facts  s-ufficient  to 
suj)port  an  inference  necessary  to  its  vaJidif)/,  the  Court  will  draw  such 
inference  and  vpliold  the  return.'"  Thus  where  a  return  alleged  fuit  amo- 
tus  per  majorem  et  burgenses,  it  was  held  to  be  sufl&cient  though  the 
power  by  the  charter,  &c.,  was  given  to  the  mayor  and  burgesses  who  had 
been  mayors,  because  as  in  such  a  case  it  shall  be  intended,  that  all  the 
burgesses  were  present  and  assented,  so  if  the  major  part  of  them  who 
had  been  mayors  did  not  assent,  an  action  might  be  brought  for  a  false 
return,  (o) 

*The  fourth  rule  is,  that  "  The  Court  cannot  assume  an  illegality 
*-  ^  or  legal  facts  inco7isistent  tvith  a  return  in  order  to  invalidate  it," 
as  that  an  assembly  to  elect,  &c.,  was  unduly  convened,  which  does  not  by 
the  return  appear  to  have  been  so.(j))  The  same  rule  has  been  propounded 
by  Buller,  J-(q)  thus  "  if  a  return  be  certain  on  the  face  of  it,  that  is 
sufficient,  and  the  Court  cannot  intend  facts  inconsistent  with  it  for  the 
purpose  of  making  it  bad." 

The  fifth  rule  is,  that  "The  Court  in  construing  a  return  will  not  pre- 
sume either  for  or  against  its  validity. {r) 

The  sixth  and  last  rule  as  to  construing  a  return,  is  that,  "  The  Court 
will  taJce  notice  of  such  legal  facts  of  lohich  they  are  judicicdly  cognizant, 
though  they  be  not particlarly  stated."  Thus  in  a  return  to  a  mandamus 
to  restore  to  a  municipal  office,  if  it  be  stated  that  the  prosecutor  was  re- 
moved by  the  municipal  body  at  large  for  a  corporate  offence,  it  is  unne- 
cessary to  aver  that  a  power  of  removal  for  such  offiBUce  is  vested  in  such 
corporation,  because  the  law  takes  notice  that  such  a  power  is  inherent  in 
its  constitution. (s) 

.]  Motion  to  quash  Return. — The  legal  formulae  by  which  a  de- 
fective return  may  be  invalidated  are  two,  the  one  by  "motion  to  quash," 
which  is  resorted  to,  when  the  return  is  vicious  by  reason  of  any  clear 
and  well  acknowledged  defect;  the  other  by  "  demurrer,"  which  is 
when  the  return  is  insufficient  for  defects  which  are  not  so  apparent  to 
the  Court,  but  that  they  require  the  invalidity  of  the  return  to  be  tested 
by  a  solemn  argument.     The  proceeding  by  "  demurrer"  has  by  a  late 

[n)  R.  T.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  V4  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit  "  Man."  (J.) 

(o)  Braithwaite's  case,  1  Vent.  20 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  3. 

Ip)  R.  v.  Shrewsbury  (Corp.),  Kel.  284.  S.  C.  Stra.  1051.  S.  C.  Y  Mod.  201  . 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (J.)     R.  v.  W.  Riding  (J.),  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  M.  C.  171. 

{q)  R.  V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  159. 

(r)  R.  V.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  158,  per  Ld.  Mansfield. 

(s)  See  ante,  p.  199.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor)  1  Doug.  159.  R.  v.  Cambridge 
(Mayor),  2  T.  R.  459.     See  Steph.  on  Pi.  p.  383,  5th  edit. 


RETURN,     ETC.  413 

statutc((!)  been  substituted  for  that  of  "  concilium/'  wbich  in  effect  was 
exactly  the  same. 

As  the  statute  of  9  Ann.  c.  20,  is  altogether  silent  as  to  the  formula;, 
whereby  a  return  when  insufficient  should  be  invalidated,  the  Court  of 
B.  R.  in  the  absence  of  any  express  direction,  adopted  a  practice  similar 
to  that  which  obtains  in  the  case  of  vicious  pleas  in  personal  actions ; 
viz.  that  when  the  return  is  upon  the  face  of  it  palpably  a  tricky  one, 
framed  only  for  the  purpose  of  delaying  the  prosecutor,(?;)  the  Court  will 
on  motion  quash  it  and  in  some  cases  award  to  the  prosecutor  a  peremptory 
*mandamus.(v)  The  Court  of  B.  R.  has  often  and  expiessly 
stated,  that  it  has  the  jurisdiction  of  interfering  summarily  in  such  L  "^-1 
cases  where  it  deems  it  proper  to  do  so,(iv)  and  that  it  is  perfectly  dis- 
cretionary with  such  Court  to  determine  the  validity,  of  the  whole  or  part 
of  a  return  cither  on  demurrer  (formerly  concilium),  or  on  motion  to 
quash. (x)  The  Court  will  not  however  quash  a  return  on  motion,  unless 
it  be  manifestly  frivolous  or  contemptuous,(y)  or  clearl}'  bad  on  the  face 
of  it,(^)  so  that  if  the  return  be  not  frivolous,  &c.,  or  clearly  bad  upon 
the  face  of  it,  its  validity  must  be  argued  on  a  demurrer,  and  not  on  a  rule 
to  quash, (o)  and  the  Court  will  refuse  to  hear  the  return  discussed  on 
motion  to  quash  on  the  ground  of  urgency  of  the  circumstances,  but  in 
such  a  case  will  direct  the  case  to  be  argued  on  an  early  day  upon  de- 
murrer, (i)  If,  therefore,  the  return  be  prima  facie  sufficient,  the  Court 
will  not  inquire  into  the  truth  of  the  facts  returned,  but  will  on  motion  to 
quash  the  return,  consider  only  whether  the  matter  of  fact  returned  be  a 
sufficient  answer  or  not  to  the  mandamus. (c) 

The  Court  will  quash  a  return  if,  as  before  stated,  it  be  upon  its  face 
palpably  a  tricky  one,  framed  only  for  the  purpose  of  delaying  the  prose- 
cutor ;  so  if  it  be  hypothetical  or  uncertain  ;  but  in  the  latter  cases  leave 

(t)  See  stat.  6  &  T  Vict.  c.  G7,  s.  1,  App.  As  to  Ireland,  which  is  governed  by  a 
legislative  provision,  in  effect  exactly  the  same,  see  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113  (6),  App. 
•  (u)  See  Chit.  Prac.  265.  R.  v.  Payn,  3  P.  &;  D.  625.  S.  C.  11  A.  &  E.  955.f 
S.  C.  2  Rail.  Cas.  1.     S.  C.  1  Jur.  54. 

(v)  R.  V.  Oundle  (Manor),  1  A.  &  E.  297-1  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  484.f  R.  v.  Cam- 
bridge (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  460,  461. 

Formerly,  if  one  contemptuously  made  an  ill  return,  the  Court  amerced  him,  and 
refused  to  allow  him  to  quash  the  return  and  make  another.  Anon.  12  Mod.  410. 
S.  C.  nom.  Lord  v.  Francis,  Holt,  llO,  171,  ante,  p.  266,  n.  (.r),  (y). 

hv)  R.  V.  Payn,  3  P.  &  D.  625.     S.  C.  11  A.  &  E.  955.1     S.  C.  2  Rail.  Cas.  1. 

[x)  R.  V.  St.  Katherine's  Dock,  4  B.&Ad.  seo.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  121.+  R.  v.  Payn, 
3  P.  &  D.  625.  S.  C.  11  A.  &  E.  955.f  S.  C.  2  Rail.  Cas.  1.  R.  v.  Swansea  Har- 
bour, 8  A.  &  E.  449,f  n.  (a).  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  512.  R.  v.  Nottingham  (Mayor),  Say. 
36,  per  Lee,  C.  J. 

(7/)  R.  V.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  392,  403.+  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524.+  See  R.  v.  St.  Saviour, 
7  A.  &  E.  925,  936.1  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  126.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  496.+  R.  v.  Kendall, 
1  Q.  B.  374.t  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  602.  S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  137,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Williams, 
3  M.  &  R.  404.     S.  C.  8  B.  &  C.  681.f 

[z)  4  B.  &  Ad.  SeO.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  121, f  supra,  n.  (z).  R.  y.  Hungerford 
Market,  4  B.  &  Ad.  335,t  n.  R.  v.  St.  Andrew,  10  A.  &  E.  739.+ 

(a)  Ante,  p.  372,  n.  (t)  ;  7  A.  &  E.  925.+  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  126.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
496,1  supra,  n.  (?/).     R.  v.  Harham  Roads  (Trustees),  4  Jur.  50. 

(b)  7  A.  &  E.  925.f     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  496-1     S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  126,  supra,  n.  (y). 

(c)  Ante,  p.  G.     R.  v.  Williams,  Say.  141,  per  Ryder,  C.  J. 


/ 


414  tapping's    mandamus. 

to  amend  is  usually  allowed  ;(r?)  but  not  if  it  be  quashed,  as  in  tLe  former 
case,  for  insufficiency  of  merits. (e)  So,  the  Court  will  Squash  it 
«-  J  if  it  be  repugnant  and  contradictory. (/)  Also,  as  the  defendant 
ought  not  to  embarrass  the  record  with  matter  which  makes  it  impossible 
for  the  prosecutor  to  plead,  or  to  know  what  it  is  he  has  to  answer,  so  the 
Court  will  quash  a  return  wdiich  is  defective  for  this  cause. (y)  So  if  a 
return  consist  of  several  independent  matters,  which  are  inconsistent,  the 
whole  return  must  be  quashed. (/ii)  But  the  Court  will  quash  only  part  of 
a  return  consisting  of  several  independent  answers,  some  of  which  are 
sufficient  in  law,  and  some  not,  provided  they  are  not  inconsistent  j(t)  and 
in  that  case  will  direct  an  issue  as  to  the  other  part,  which  if  found  by  the 
jury  for  the  defendant,  will  be  sufficient  to  prevent  a  peremptory  manda- 
mus.(J)  The  Court  will  not  quash  a  return  on  affidavits  of  its  falsity,(7(;) 
nor  because  it  was  filed  too  late.(/) 

.     Application  ;  Affidavits. — If  the  ground  of  the  motion  to  quash 

be  any  defect  apparent  on  the  return,  or  because  of  its  invalidity  in  point 
of  law,  affidavits  are  not  required ;  but  if  the  case  require  that  any  fact  or 
facts  should  be  deposed  to,  such  affidavits  must  be  produced. (?3i) 

.     Rule. — The  rule  nisi  for  quashing  a  return,  where  it  is  palpably 

defective,  need  not  go  into  the  Crown  paper  j(?i)  in  such  case,  the  Court 
will  either  appoint  an  early  day  for  its  argument,  or  direct  it  to  be  brought 
on  as  an  ordinary  rule. 

.]     Shewing  Catise. — In  shewing  cause  against  the  rule  nisi,  the 

defendant  may  insist  upon  any  objection  to  the  writ,  which  shews  that  it 
should  not  have  issued. (o) 

(d)  Ante,  p.  369,  n.  (h).  R.  v.  London  Dock,  5  A.  &  E.  163.f  S.  C.  6  N.  &  M. 
390.f     See  ante,  tit.  "  Writ"  (Amendment). 

(e)  R.  V.  Norwicli  (Dean),  Stra.  159.  R.  v.  March,  Burr.  1005.  R.  v.  Raines,  3 
Salk.  232,  11.  R.  v.  St.  Andrew,  10  A.  &  E.  13G.f  R.  v.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  Burr. 
T45.  R.  V.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  555.t  S.  C.  1  Rail.  Cas.  509. 
S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48  ;  and  see  3  A.  &  E.  544.t  R.  v.  Wix  (Inhabs.),  2  B.  &  Ad. 
203.f     See  ante,  tit.  "  Amendment,"  p.  368,  369. 

(/)  Ante.  p.  361,  n.  (k).  R.  v.  Old  Hall  (Manor),  10  A.  &  E.  253.f  R.  v.  Nor- 
wich (Mayor),  2  Salk.  436,  17.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1244.     S.  C.  Holt,  444. 

[c/)  R.  V.  Old  Hall  (Manor),  10  A.  &  E.  253.f  R.  v.  Norwich  (Mayor),  2  Salk. 
436.     S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1244. 

(h)  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  69,  74,  per  Ld.  Kenyon,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Norwich 
(Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  1244.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  436,  17.  R.  v.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  2  T. 
R.  456 ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (J.)     See  ante,  p.  361,  n.  (k). 

As  to  double  and  inconsistent  returns,  see  ante,  p.  360 — 362. 

(?)  See  ante,  p.  360,  n.  (a).  R.  v.  North  Midland  Railway,  11  A.  &  E.  956,f 
n.  {b).  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  622.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  255.f  R.V.Cam- 
bridge (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  456. 

(j)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  461,  and  supra,  n.  (h). 

{k}  R.  V.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  392.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524.f  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.), 
1  T.  R.  467.  R.  V.  Old  Hall  (Manor),  10  A.  &  E.  256.f  Goubot  v.  De  Crouy,  1 
Cromp.  &  M.  772.*  S.  C.  3  Tyrwh.  906.  S.  C.  2  D.  86.  R.  v.  Round,  5  N.  &  M. 
427,t  n.  (b).     S.  C.  4  A.  &  E.  ISO.f 

(l)  R.  V.  Kendall,  1  Q.  B.  374,t  per  Lord  Denman,  C.  J. 

(rw)  R.  v.  St.  Katharine's  Dock,  4  B.  &  Ad.  360.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  121.t  And 
see  6  A.  &  E.  405.1     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  528.t 

[n)  R.  V.  St.  Katharine's  Dock,  1  N.  &  M.  121. f     S.  C.  4  B.  &  Ad.  360.t 

(o)  See  p.  336,  n.  (m),  338,  n.  (c).     See  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  1  (E.),  and  9 


RETURN,     ETC.  415 

* .     Kxih  Absolute. — If  upon  argument,  the  Court  be  0^^375-1 

opinion  that  the  return  is  insufficient,  a  rule  to  quash  it  will  be 
^ranted,  which  must  be  drawn  up  and  entered  in  the  Crown  Office,  but 
need  not   be  served,  and  a  peremptory  writ  of  mandamus  ordered  to 

issue,  (p). 

.]     Demurrer  to  Retxmi. — We  have  by  the  few  lastly  preceding 

pages,  briefly  considered  the  former  of  the  alternative  formula)  by  which 
a  return  may  be  invalidated,  viz.  a  "  motion  to  quash ;"  we  now  proceed 
to  consider  the  latter  of  such  legal  formula3,  namely,  the  proceeding  by 
way  of  "  demurrer,"  which  has  by  a  late  statute(2)  been  substituted  for 
a  "concilium,"  which  in  eff"cct  was  precisely  equivalent  to  a  demurrer;(?-) 
for  thereby  the  whole  question  of  law,  including  that  of  the  goodness  of 
the  writ  of  mandamus  itself,  was  considered, (.s)  and  also  that  if  a  judg- 
ment establishing  the  validity  of  the- return  in  law  were  given,  the  prose- 
cutor could  not  afterwards  traverse  the  facts  contained  in  it.(/)  So  where 
on  a  return,  a  concilium  had  been  obtained,  and  the  return  on  r*3>j'Q-i 
argument  held  insufficient  in  law,  and  a  peremptory  mandamus 
awarded,  the  Court  would  not,  at  the  instance  of  the  party  making  such 
return,  withhold  the  peremptory  writ,  and  direct  the  prosecutor  to  demur 
to  the  return,  in  order  that  the  case  might  go  to  a  Court  of  Error.  («) 

&  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  6  (I.),  App.  R.  v.  St.  Katharine's  Dock,  1  N.  &  M.  121.f  S.  C. 
4  B.  &  Ad.  360,  363,f  per  Parke,  J.  R.  v.  Margate  Pier,  3  B.  &  A.  220. f  R.  v. 
Bristow,  G  T.  R.  168.  See  ante,  tit.  "Writ"  (Amendment).  Formerly  the  Court 
would  only  hear  one  counsel  of  a  side  on  the  same  day ;  Comb.  280. 

As  to  affidavits  to  be  used  on  argument,  see  R.  v.  Harham  Road  (Trustees),  4 
Jur.  50.  r.         .    . 

{p\  See  ante,  p.  339;  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  186.  R.  v.  Ouze  Bank  Commissioners,  3 
A.  &  E.  549.t  R.  V.  Liverpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  T35.  R.  v.  Doncaster  (Mayor), 
Burr.  745.     And  see  5  T.  R.  69 ;  Ld.  Raym.  1244.     S.  C.  2  Salk.  436,  17. 

(q\  See  ante,  p.  372,  n.  (<). 

(r)  R.  V.  Oundle  (Mayor),  1  A.  &  E.  297,  299.t  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  484.t  R.  v. 
Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  558.t  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.  R.  v.  Dublin 
(Dean),  Stra.  537.  R.  v.  Birmingham  Railway,  2  Q.  B.  47.1  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  324. 
See  Stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2.     R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  259. 

The  mode  of  obtaining  the  opinion  of  the  Court  upon  a  return,  by  way  of  "Con- 
cilium" was  this,— the  prosecutor  obtained  a  motion  paper  signed  by  counsel, 
indorsed  "  to  move  for  a  '  Concilium'  to  quash  the  return,  and  for  a  peremptory 
mandamus,"  which  being  taken  to  the  Crown  Office,  the  rule  was  drawn  up  and 
entered,  and  the  case  inserted  in  the  Crown  paper  for  argument :  the  subsequent 
proceedings  were  similar  to  those  of  demurrer.  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  185,  186.  R.  v. 
St.  Pancras  (Trustees),  3  A.  &  E.  535.t  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222.1  Cr.  Off.  Rules,  r. 
22   Add 

The  rule  must  have  been  obtained  by  the  prosecutor  before  he  bad  pleaded,  for 
after  having  taken  that  step  he  was  not  at  liberty  to  withdraw  his  plea  and  set 
down  the  return  for  argument  on  concilium ;  a  rule  nisi  for  that  purpose  has  been 
discharged  on  the  ground  that  the  effect  of  it  would  be  to  deprive  the  defendant 
of  the  opportunity  of  taking  the  case  to  a  Court  of  Error.  Wilsford  v.  Doncaster 
(Mayor),  Burr.  738.  R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  2  G.  &  D.  585,  n.  (a).  R.  v.  West  Riding 
(J.),  5  Q.  B.  l.f  R.  V.  Old  Hall  (Manor),  10  A.  &  E.  555.1  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  518. 
S.  C.  W.  W.  &  D.  650.     See  ante,  p.  372,  n.  {t). 

(s)  Ante,  p.  338,  n.  (c),  374,  n.  (0).  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E. 
558.+     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.     S.  C.  1  Rail.  Cas.  509. 

(0  R.  V.  Oundle  (Mayor),  1  A.  &  E.  299,t  per  Patteson,  J.  R.  v.  London 
(Mayor),  3  B.&  Ad.  275.+     S.  C.  2  N.  &  M.  126.t     R.  v.  Payn,  11  A.  &  E.  957-1 

{u)  R.  V.  Oundle  (Manor),  1  A.  &  E.  283,  297.t     S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  484,  496.1 


416  T  A  r  p  I  y  G '  s    mandamus. 

It  is  sincmlar  that  although  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  '2,  permits  the 
prosecutor  merely  to  plead  to,  or  traverse  a  return,  vet  should  allow  the 
defendant  to  reply,  take  issue  or  demur  to  such  plea  or  traverse,  or  in 
other  words  that  the  power  to  demur  should  have  heen  specifically  given 
to  the  defendant  and  not  to  the  prosecutor.  It  was  this  distinction  which 
crave  rise  to  the  practice,  that  where  an  insufficient  return  was  filed,  the 
prosecutor  was  allowed  to  make  an  application  to  the  Court,  in  the  nature 
of  a  demurrer,  and  called  a  ''  concilium"  to  quash  it,  which  if  it  were 
^ranted  and  were  ultimately  successful,  a  peremptory  mandamus  was  at 
once  awarded,  as  there  could  be  no  proceeding  by  writ  of  error. (r)  This 
method  of  procedure  being  found  to  be  in  many  cases  greatly  inconveni- 
ent the  more  so  as  writs  of  mandamus  had  of  late  years  very  much 
increased,  and  were  frequently  awarded  in  cases  of  considerable  import- 
ance, it  became  necessary  for  the  purposes  of  justice  that  the  prosecutor 
should  have  the  power  to  demur  to  a  return  made  to  any  such  writ,  in 
order  that  the  decision  of  the  Courts  having  jurisdiction  over  them,  as  to 
the  validity  of  such  return,  should  be  reviewed  by  a  Court  of  Error  for 
remedy,  whereof  it  is  by  stat.  6  &  7  Yict.  c.  67,  s.  l,(ic)  enacted,  that  in 
all  cases  in  which  the  prosecutor  of  any  writ  of  mandamus  shall  wish  or 
intend  to  object  to  the  validity  of  any  return,  then  or  thereafter  to  be 
made  to  the  same,  he  shall  do  so  by  way  of  demurrer  to  the  same  in  such 
and  the  like  manner  as  is  now  practised  and  used  in  the  Court  of  B.  R., 
or  the  Courts  of  the  cotmties  palatine  in  personal  actions,  and  thereupon 
the  same  writ  and  return  and  the  said  demurrer  shall  be  entered  upon 
record  in  the  said  Courts  respectively,  and  such  and  the  like  further  pro- 
ceedings shall  be  thereupon  had  and  taken  as  upon  a  demurrer,  to  plead- 
ings in  personal  actions  in  the  said  Courts  respectively,  and  the  said 
Courts  respectively  shall  thereupon  adjudge  either  that  the  said  return  is 
valid  in  law,  or  that  it  is  not  valid  in  law,  or  that  the  writ  of  mandamus 
ia  not  valid  in  law,  and  if  they  adjudge  that  .the  said  vrrit  is  valid  in  law, 

but  *that  the  return  thereto  is  not  valid  in  law,  then  and  in  every 

'-  -'  such  case  they  shall  also  by  their  said  judgment  award  that  a 
peremptory  mandamus  shall  issue  in  that  behalf,  and  thereupon  such 
peremptory  writ  of  mandamus  may  be  sued  out  and  issued  accordingly,  at 
any  time  after  four  days  from  the  signing  of  the  said  judgment,  and  it 
shall  be  lawful  for  the  said  Courts  respectively,  and  they  are  thereby 
reciuired  in  and  by  their  said  judgment  to  award  costs  to  be  paid  to  the 
party  in  whose  favour  they  shall  thereby  decide,  by  the  other  party  or 
parties. 

f  r)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  460,  461.  R.  v.  Oundle  (Manor).  1  A.  k 
E.  297,  293.t  R.  t.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  558.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D. 
48."  S.  C.  1  Rail.  Cas.  509.  As  to  obtaining  time  to  demur,  see  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20, 
s.  6.  App.  As  to  quashing  return,  see  ante,  p.  372 — 375.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat. 
19  Geo.  2.  c.  12,  App.  _  t.-    •      .  .   «  »- 

(it)  See  stat.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  the  proTision  totidem  verbis  in  stat.  y  « 
10  Yict,  c.  113,  s.  6,  App. 


RETURN',     ETC.  417 

As  before  stated,(:>:)  it  is  discretionary  with  the  Court  cither  to  deter- 
mine the  validity  of  a  return  on  motion  to  quash,  or  to  direct  the  prose- 
cutor to  demur,  in  order  that  the  case  be  set  down  in  the  Crown  paper  for 
argument. (j/-)  If  the  return  be  clearly  bad  on  the  face  of  it,  the  Court 
will  quash  it  on  motion  3(2)  but  if  it  be  not  clearly  bad  upon  the  face  of 
it,  nor  frivolous,  or  if  it  raise  matters  of  law,  its  validity  must  be  argued 
on  demurrer,  and  not  on  a  rule  to  quash  it.(a)  So,  if  the  return  disclo.se 
a  case  of  difficulty,  the  Court  usually  orders  it  to  be  brought  on  in  the 
Crown  paper,(/>)  or  if  it  involve  an  abstruse  question  of  law  will  direct  it 
to  be  set  down  in  the  special  paper  for  an  argument. (c) 

The  form  and  practice  of  a  demurrer  in  the  case  of  a  mandamus  is  by 
Stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  1,  (E.),  and  9  &  10  Yiet.  c.  113,  s.  6,  (I.),  the 
same  in  all  respects  as  a  demurrer  in  the  case  of  personal  actions. (<7) 
The  demurrer  must  be  entered  at  the  Crown  dffice,  and  a  copy  filed  there 
beside  the  one  delivered  to  the  opposite  party. 

.]     Joinder  in  Demurrer. — There  must  be  one  and  only  one  side 

bar  rule  to  join  in  demurrer  which  must  be  drawn  up  and  served  upon 
the  opposite  party,  (and  no  peremptory  rule  given  thereon),  it  expires  in 
four  days  next  after  service. (f)  The  joinder  must  be  entered  at  the 
CrowTi  office,  and  delivered  and  filed  as  the  demurrer,  and  on  de- 
fault  being  made  *judgment  by  default  may  be  signed.(y)  If  on  L  '""  "J 
thj  other  hand  a  joinder  in  demurrer  be  filed  and  delivered,  either  party 

(x)  See  tit.  -  Quashing  Retnrn,"  p.  372 — 375. 

{y)  R.  T.  St.  Katharines  DockJ  4  B.  &  Ad.  SGO.f     S.  C.  1  X.  <fc  M.  121.f 
(z)  See  tit.  '•  Quashing  Return,''  ante,  p.  372 — 375  :  4  B.  i:  Ad.  362.f     S.  C.  1 
X.  &M.  121.t     Ante.  p.  372,  n.  (f). 

(a)  R.  T.  St.  Saviour's  (Parish),  3  X.  &  P.  126.  S.  C.  7  A.  i  E.  925-1  R.  t. 
Payn,  3  X.  k  P.  165.  R.  v.  Round,  4  A.  &  E.  139.f  S.  C.  5  X.  k  il.  427-1  S.  C. 
1  H.  &  W.  546.  R.  T.  St.  Margaret  (Parish),  1  P.  i  D.  124,  n.  [b).  S.  C.  8  A-  i; 
E.  889.t     S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  510. 

(b)  4  B.  «  Ad.  300.t  S.  C.  1  X.  k  31. 121,f  supra,  n.  (y).  R.  x.  London  niavor), 
3  B-  &  Ad.  255-t     S.  C.  2  X.  k  M.  126.t 

(<•)  R.  V.  Mildmay  (Dame),  5  B.  &  Ad.  256.t     S.  C.  2  X.  k  M.  778.f 

(d)  For  the  practice  of  a  demurrer  in  personal  actions,  see  Chit.  Prac.  827 — 

837,  8th  edit. 

As  to  cases  within  the  stats.  1  Wm.  4.  c.  21,  s.  4  (E.),  and  9  t  10  Vict.  c.  113, 

s.  3  (I.),  (see  stats.  App.),  it  is  thereby  provided  in  whose  name  the  demurrer  shall 

be  joined,  and  the  proceedings  to  judgment  carried  on.     See  ante,  p.  302,  n.  [g), 

313,  n.  (4  342,  n.  (r). 

(c)  Crown  OflF.  Rules,  r.  18  :  see  rules,  App.     Form  of  role  : — 

"  Saturday,  the day  of .  in  the year  of  the  reign  of  Queen  Yictoria. 

In  the  Queen's  Bench. 

(Yenue.) 
The  Queen  on  the  prosecution  of  S.  B.  k  J.  E. 
agft. 
J.  W.  and  T-  C,  Chapelwardens- 
Unless  the  defendants  shall  join  in  demurrer  with  the  prosecutors,  within  four 
days  next  after  service  of  this  rule  upon  the  attorney  or  agent  for  the  said  defend- 
ants, let  judgment  be  entered  for  the  said  prosecutors  against  the  said  defendants, 
for  want  of  a  join^der  in  demurrer. 

Side  Bar.     By  the  Court." 

(/)  Crown  Off.  Rules,  r.  19,  App.    And  see  tit.  "  Pleas"  (Judgment  by  default). 
June,  1852.— 27 


418  tapping's    mandamus. 

(usually  the  party  demurring),  may  proceed  without  a  previous  motion  or 
a  rule  for  a  "concilium,"  to  set  down  (at  the  Crown  office)  the  demurrer 
for  iirii-umcnt.  It  has  however  been  held  that,  when  the  business  of  a 
vacation  sittings  has  been  appointed,  a  demurrer  cannot  be  argued  at  such 
sittings  without  the  consent  of  the  Court  and  of  all  parties.  If,  however, 
it  be  so  agreed,  the  demurrer  may  be  set  down  at  such  sittings  to  be 
argued  as  on  a  concilium,  and  with  the  same  consequences. (^) 

.]     Paper  Books. — In  all  cases  entered  for  argument  in  the  Crown 

paper,  the  prosecutor  or  his  attorney  should  deliver  a  paper  book  of  the 
proceedings  to  each  of  the  two  senior  Judges  of  the  Court,  and  the  defen- 
dant or  his  attorney  should  in  like  manner  make  and  deliver  a  paper  book 
to  the  third  and  fourth  Judges  of  the  said  Court  respectively,  two  days 
before  the  day  on  which  the  case  will  be  put  in  the  paper  for  argument ; 
and  such  several  paper  books  should  in  all  cases,  (except  where  a  special 
case  is  reserved  for  the  opinion  of  the  Court),  contain  in  the  margin 
thereof,  or  appended  thereto,  and  to  be  delivered  therewith,  the  points 
intended  to  be  argvied,  but  should  not  contain  any  other  observation  or 
matter,  than  such  points  for  argument,  together  with  copies  of  the  pro- 
ceedings, and  a  copy  of  the  rule  nisi  to  quash,  or  for  a  concilium.  Judg- 
ment may  be  given  by  the  Court  against  a  party  neglecting  to  deliver 
paper  books  to  the  Judges,  or  delivering  the  same  without  the  points  for 
argument,  if  the  Court  shall  so  please. (/() 

The  briefs  for  counsel  are  the  same  as  in  ordinary  cases,  (t) 

"Where  necessary  for  the  attainment  of  justice,  and  to  try  the  validity 
of  a  return,  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will,  on  motion,  grant  a  rule  to  insj^ect 
corporation  books,  &c.,  though  the  corporation  be  not  a  party  to  the 
*dispute  j(j)  but  such  a  rule  will  not  be  granted  until  after  the 
L  J  filing  of  the  return, (A-)  because,  until  then,  the  Court  cannot  see 
that  such  inspection  will  be  necessary. (/)  The  Court  never  grants  a  rule 
to  inspect  corporation  charters,  as  copies  of  them  may  be  obtained  at  the 
Rolls.(Hi) 

.]     Arc/ument. — The  case  is  called  on  for  argument  in  its  turn, 

and  the  arguments  are  conducted  as  in  a  demurrer  in  a  personal  action. (h) 
It  is  also  the  practice,  on  a  demurrer  to  a  return  to  a  mandamu.s,  to  hear 
one  counsel  only  on  each  side.(o) 

It  has  been  held,  that  when  a  return  to  a  mandamus  has  been  made, 

{g)  R.  V.  Kendall,  1  Q.  B.  374.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  602.  S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
137,  Q.  B. 

(A)  Crown  Off.  Rules,  r.  23,  App.  See  form  of  points  of  demurrer.  R.  v.  Con- 
yers,  15  J.  L.,  N.  S.  300,  Q.  B.     R.  v.  Arnaud,  16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  52,  Q.  B. 

{i)  See  Chit.  Prac.  833. 

\j)  R.  v.  Newcastle  Hostmen,  Stra.  1233  ;  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  189. 

(/f)  R.  V.  Nottingham,  1  W.  Blac.  58.  R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  Say.  144,  (the  practice 
iB  otherwise  on  Quo  Warranto). 

II)  Anon.,  1  Barn.  26.     Anon.,  2  Salk.  430.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  2. 

\m)   \i.  V.  Tucker,  1  Barn.  28.     Anon.  2  Salk.  430. 

(n)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras  (Trustees),  3  A.  &  E.  535,  538.f     S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222.t 

(o)  U.  V.  Gordon,  1  B.  &  A.  526,t  n.  (a). 


RETURN,     ETC.  419 

and  a  concilium  obtained,  the  counsel  objecting  to  the  return,  i.  e.  coun- 
sel for  tlic  Crown,  is  entitled  to  begin,  and  must  bo  heard  first,  though 
the  opposite  counsel  take  an  objection  to  the  form  of  the  writ,(oo)  as  in 
the  case  of  a  demurrer  in  a  personal  action. (p) 

No  objection  to  a  return  can  be  made,  except  for  defects  apparent  upon 
the  face  of  it.(^)  Nor  will  the  Court  permit  a  point  that  has  been  decided 
on  the  rule  nisi  for  the  writ  to  be  again  discussed  on  the  deraurrer.(r) 
Thus  it  is  then  too  late  to  raise  objections  which  impugn  the  propriety  of 
originally  issuing  the  writ,(.s)  as  that  the  proper  remedy  was  indictment, 
and  not  mandamus. (/) 

It  was  formerly  held,  that  it  was  too  late,  when  arguing  on  the  validity 
of  a  return,  to  make  any  objection  to  the  Writ  itself,  for  the  several  rea- 
sons :  first,  that  the  defendant  should  have  applied  to  the  Court  to  have 
quashed  it ;  secondly,  that  he,  by  making  a  return,  precluded  himself 
from  objecting  to  that  which  he  had  elected  to  answer  •,{u)  and  lastly,  be- 
cause after  the  rule  for  the  writ  has  been  made  *absolute,  it  was  a  p;:ooQ-| 
rule,  that  all  that  was  open  for  the  defendant  to  do,  was  either  to 
comply  with  the  first  writ,  or  to  give  a  good  legal  answer  to  it,  and  that 
if  neither  were  done,  a  peremptory  mandamus  would  be  awarded. (t')  But 
these  rules,  and  the  decisions  upon  which  they  were  founded,  are  clearly 
at  variance  with  the  latter  authority,  and  the  statutory  provisions  upon 
this  point,  and  it  may  now  be  taken  as  a  rule,  that  a  defect  in  substance 
to  the  writ  appearing  on  the  record,  may  be  taken  advantage  of  after  the 
return  filed,  or  at  any  time  before  the  issuing  of  the  peremptory  manda- 
mus •,{w')  because  quod  initio  vitiosum  est  non  potest  tractu  temporis  con- 
valescere.(x)  Thus,  an  objection  that  the  writ  is  directed  to  a  steward  of 
a  manor  alone,  in  a  case  where  the  lord  ought  to  be  joined,  is  matter  of 
substance,  and  may  be  taken  at  any  time.(.Tir)  So  where  the  writ  is  bad 
for  excess,  &c.(^) 

(oo)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras  (Trustees),  3  A.  &  E.  535,  538,1  n.  (a).  S.  C.  5  N.  k  M. 
222.f     R.  V.  St.  Pancras  (Trustees),  G  A.  &E.  314-1     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  507.t 

{p)  R.  V.  Smith,  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  166,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  eiO.f  S.  C.  1  D.  &  M. 
565. 

(q)  R.  V.  St.  Margaret  (Parish),  10  A.  &  E.  I32,f  n.  (a). 

(r)  R.  V.  Leicester  (J.),  4  B.  &  C.  896,f  n.  (a). 

(,?)  R.  V.  Nottingham  Old  Waterworks,  6  A.  &  E.  365.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  480.f  R. 
V.  St.  Katharine's  Dock,  4  B.  &  Ad.  3G3.f     S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  121.f 

(t)  R.  V.  Bristol  Dock,  2  V.  B.  64.f  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  236.  S.  C.  2  Rail.  Cas. 
599. 

{u)  See  ante,  p.  338,  n.  (c),  3Y4,  n.  (o).  R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  74,  75.  See 
ante,  tit.  "  Quashing  Writ,"  p.  336 — 339. 

{v)  R.  V.  The  Brewers'  Compan}-,  4  D.  &  R.  497.1     S.  C.  3  B.  &  C.  l72.t 

(w)  R.  V.  Margate  Pier,  3  B.  &  A.  221.t  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  7  T.  R.  48.  R. 
V.  Physicians'  Coll.,  Burr.  2742.  R.  v.  Shepton  Mallett  (Overseers),  5  Mod.  420. 
R.  V.  Abingdon  (Mayor),  2  Salk.  699,  700.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  559.  S.  C.  Garth.  499. 
R.  v.  Chester  (City),  5  Mod.  10.  R.  v.  Ward,  Stra.  893.  R.  v.  Tregony  (Mayor), 
8  Mod.  Ill,  127.  Taylor  v.  Gloucester  (City),  1  Roll.  409.  R.  v.  Littleport  "(Pa- 
rish), 6  Mod.  97.  See  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  1,  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9 
&  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  6,  App. 

(x)  D.  50,  tit.  17,  f.  29. 

(xx)  P.  V.  Powell,  1  Q.  B.  352.1  S.  C.  4  P  &  D.  719.  S.  C.  10  L.  S.,  N.S.  148, 
Q.  B.     See  ante,  p.  158,  n.  (J),  (k). 

(?/)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras  (Trustees),  3  A.  &  E.  535.f     S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222.f 


420  tapping's    mandamus. 

1     Jiulijmcnt. — The  judgment  is  given  as  in  ordinary  cases.   The 

Court  in  f^iving  judgment,  will  first  dispose  of  the  objections  to  the  writ, 
for  if  that  be  bad,  then  the  sufficiency  or  not  of  the  return  is  immateri- 
al.(2)  Where  one  part  only  of  a  divisible  return  is  bad,  it  will,  not,  on 
demurrer,  in  analogy  to  the  practice  as  to  "  quashing,"  render  invalid  that 
which  per  so  is  good. (a) 

By  Stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  G7,  s.  1,(&)  it  is  enacted  that  upon  the  argu- 
ment of  a  demurrer,  the  Court  shall  adjudge  either  that  the  said  return  is 
valid  in  law,  or  that  it  is  not  valid  in  law,  or  that  the  writ  of  mandamus 
is  not  valid  in  law,  and  if  they  adjudge  that  the  said  writ  is  valid  in  law, 
but  that  the  return  thereto  is  not  valid  in  law,  then,  and  in  every  such 
case,  they  shall  also,  by  their  judgment,  award  that  a  peremptory  manda- 
mus shall  issue  in  that  behalf.  And  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  said  Courts 
respectively,  and  they  are  thereby  required  in  and  by  their  said  judgment, 
to  award  costs  to  be  paid  to  the  party  in  *whose  favour  they  shall 
■^  -'  thereby  decide  by  the  other  party  or  parties. (c)  The  judgment, 
when  given,  is  entered  of  record. (rf) 

.]      Costs. — It  has  been  held,  after  argument  and  judgment  on  a 

return  to  a  writ  of  mandamus,  costs  will  be  given  to  the  successful  party, 
unless  very  strong  grounds  of  exemption  be  shown  ;(e)  and  also,  that 
costs,  in  such  case,  are  entirely  within  the  discretion  of  the  Court,  under 
Stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  G,  although  that  section,  in  terms,  provided  only 
for  the  costs  of  an  application,  where  the  writ  shall  be  refused,  or  issued 
and  obeyed.(/)  But  by  the  subsequent  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  \,{g) 
it  would  seem  that  the  discretionary  power  conferred  by  stat.  1  Wm.  4, 
c.  21,  s.  6,  has  been  taken  away,  tbe  words  of  the  former  act  being,  that 

(z)  R.  V.  Darlington  School,  6  Q.  B.  682,  697.1     S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  67,  Q.  B. 
R  V.  Bristol  Dock,  9  D.  &  R.  316.t     S.  C.  6  B.  &  C.  181,  189.t 

(a)  See  ante,  p.  374,  n.  (/).  R.  v.  New  Windsor  (Major),  7  Q.  B.  908.f  S.  C. 
13  L.  J.,  N.J.  337,  Q.B. 

(b)  See  stat.  App..  and  ante,  p.  376. 

(c)  The  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  6,  as  to  Ireland,  contains  a  like  enactment. 
\d)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras  (Trustees),  3  A.  &  E.  535,  538.t    S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222.t  R. 

v.  Darlington  School,  6  Q.  B.  682,  697-1     S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  67,  Q.  B. 

The  follo\Ying  is  a  form  of  judgment  on  concilium,  affirming  sufficiency  of  a  re- 
turn to  a  mandamus  ;— "  Whereupon  all  and  singular  the  premises  having  been 
"  seen  and  fully  understood  by  the  Court  of  our  said  Lady  the  Queen  now  here,  it 
"  is  considered  and  adjudged  by  the  said  Court  here,  that  the  said  return  is  good 
"  and  sufficient  in  law  to  preclude  him,  the  said  M.  S.,  from  being  admitted  into 
"  the  said  place  and  office  of  alderman  of  the  ward  of  Portsoken,  in  the  said  city 
"  of  London,  and  that  the  said  mayor  and  alderman  of  the  city  of  London  do  go 
"  without  day  in  this  behalf."     R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  275.t    S.  C.  2  N. 

&M.  126.+  ,  .     „ 

(e)  R.  V.  Newcastle  (Mayor),  1  Q.  B.  751.1     S.  C.   1  G.  &  D.  388,  cited  in  R.  v. 

St.  Pancras,  2  D.,  N.  S.  957.     R.  v.  Dartmouth  (Mayor),  2  D.,  N.  S.  982.     S.  C.  12 

L  J    N  S.  83,  M.  C.     R.  t.  St.  Saviour,  7  A.  &  E.  948-1     S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  126.    S. 

C.  1  N.  &  P.  496-t      R-  V.  Newbury  (Mayor),  2  G.  &  D.  109.      S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  751.t 

S.  C.  11  L-  J-,  N-  S-  149,  Q.  B.     See  post,  tit.  "  Costs." 

(  n  R.  V.  Scott,  1  D.  &  L.  212-     And  see  1  Q.  B-  751-t  S-  C.  1  G.  &  D.  388,  and 

1G.&D-117.     S.  C-  1  Q.  B.  636,t  and  1  G.  &  D.  127.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  660-1  S.  0. 

9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  362,  Q-  B. 

((?)  See  a  like  enactment  as  to  Ireland,  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  6,  App. 


PLEA,    ETC. 


421 


"  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  said  Courts  respectively,  and  they  arc  hereby 
required,  in  and  by  their  said  judgment,  to  award  costs  to  be  paid  by  the 
party  in  whose  favour  they  shall  thereby  decide,  by  the  other  party  or 
parties. "(/i) 


♦CHAPTER  THE  SEVENTH. 


[*382] 


THE  PLEA,  REPLICATION,  AND  SUBSEQUENT   PROCEEDINGS  INCLUSIVE  OF 
THE  PEREMPTORY  WRIT  OF    MANDAMUS. 

Having  in  the  preceding  Chapter  treated  of  the  Return,  and  of  those 
formula)  whereby  it  may  be  invalidated,  if  it  bear  upon  its  face  evidence 
of  its  legal  insufficiency,  it  is  proposed  in  the  present  Chapter,  agreeably 
with  the  following  analysis,  to  treat  both  of  those  proceedings  whereby 
the  prosecutor  or  the  defendant  may  have  his  right  tried  upon  the  merits, 
and  also  of  the  peremptory  writ,  to  which  the  prosecutor  is  entitled  if 
ultimately  successful. 


Plea. 


Trial 


What 

Time  to  plead         _         .  - 

Rule  to  plead          .         .  - 

Enforcing  plea        _         _  - 

Form  of  plea 

Filing     -         -         -  - 
"Withdrawal  of  plea 
Judgment  by  default 
Demurrer  to  pleas 

E.eplication    -         -         -  - 

Rejoinder,  &c.         .         _  - 

Rule  to  reply,  rejoin,  join 
in  demurrer,  &c. 

Issue     -         -         -         -  - 

Notice  of  Trial        _         _  - 

Subpoena        _         .         -  - 

Record           _         -         -  - 

Jury  Process           _         _  _ 


Jeofails,  &c.  - 

Amendments,  &c.  - 

Verdict 

Damages 

Costs     -        -        - 

Judgment 

How  signed     - 
Entry  on  Roll 


383 
383 

384 
384 
385 
386 

386 
386 
387 
387 
387 

387 
387 
388 
388 
388 
389 
389 
389 
390 
392 
392 
394 
395 
395 
395 


Judgment — Entry  on  Roll. 

How  entered  -  -  396 
Nunc  pro  tunc  -  -  396 
As  in  case  of  nonsuit  -  396 
Non  obstante  veredicto  -  397 
Motion  in  arrest  of  Judg- 
ment -  -  -  -  397 
Motion  for  a  new  Trial  -  397 
Error 

Writ  of  Error  -         -  -  397 

Joinder  in  Error     -         -  -  399 
Execution. 

Writs  of  Execution  -  -  399 

Peremptory  Mandamus. 

What 400 

When  granted        _         _  _  400 

Against  whom        _         -  -  404 

How  obtained         _         .  .  404 

Motion  where  and  when 

made  .         -  -  406 

Rules  nisi  and  absolute  -  407 
When  writ  peremptory  in  first 

instance       -         -  -  407 

Form  of  Writ  -  -  407 

How  issued     -         -  -  408 

Returns  -         -  -  408 

Setting  it  aside       -         -  -  408 

Amendment  of  Writ        -  -  409 


.]      ^Yhat. — The  pleading  with  which  the   prosecutor  meets  or 

answers  the  defendant's  return,  if  sufficient  in  law,  though  false  in  fact, 


(/()  See  further  as  to  costs,  post,  tit.  "  Costs. 


422  tapting's    mandamus. 


P^qoq-i  *pi"OviJeJ  lie  does  not  Avisb  to  proceed  at  common  law  by 
action  for  the  false  return,  is  termed  a  Flea,  wliicli  answers 


by  way  of 
I's  to  the 

pleading  of  the  same  name  in  a  personal  action ;  except  that  in  cases  of 
mandamus  it  is,  as  in  replevin,  the  prosecutor's  pleading,  (a) 

At  common  law,  no  traverse  to  a  return  was  allowed,  the  only  remedy 
then  available  for  the  prosecutor,  if  injured  by  a  return  false  in  fact, 
being  an  action  on  the  case  for  such  false  return, (i)  which  proceeding  he 
could  not,  however,  adopt,  until  such  return  had  been  adjudged  to  be 
good  in  law  ',  for  the  alleged  reason,  that  if  it  were  insufficient  in  law,  the 
prosecutor  could  not  be  prejudiced  by  it,(r)  because  the  Court,  on  motion 
would  quash  \i.{(l)  It  was  this  grievance  which  induced  the  remedy 
which  the  prosecutor  now  has  by  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  whereby  he  is 
empowered  to  plead  to  or  traverse  the  facts  in  the  return,  as  in  an  action 
on  the  case  for  a  false  return ;  the  practical  eifect  of  which  is,  that  if  the 
issue  on  the  traverse  be  found  for  the  prosecutor,  it  becomes  immaterial 
whether  the  return  be  or  not  sufficient  in  law  j  for  he  is  entitled  to  have  a 
peremptory  mandamus,  in  the  same  manner  as  he  would  have  had,  if  the 
return  have  been  adjudged  insufficient :  so  that  if  it  turn  out  that  the  re- 
turn is  untrue  in  fact,  the  result  is  the  same  as  though  it  be  true  in  fact, 
and  insufficient  in  law.(e)  The  above  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  which  has  ap- 
plication to  municipal  offices  only,  has  been  subsequently  extended  by  stat. 

1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  to  writs  of  mandamus  in  all  other  cases.  (/) 

].      Time  to  Plead. — The  prosecutor  should,  pursuant  to  stat.  9 

Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  (^),  within  a  reasonable  time,(/«)  plead  to  the  return. 

*After  judgment  has  been  entered  on  demurrer  to  the  return, 
L  -•  the  prosecutor  has  no  right  to  file  pleas  traversing  such  return, 
and  if  filed,  the  Court  will,  on  motion,  order  them  to  be  taken  oflF  the 
file;(/)  which  rule  proceeds  on  the  assumption,  that  the  Court  will  not 

(a)  See  stats.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  App.  See  post,  tit. 
"Action,  &c.,  for  false  return." 

(6)  See  ante,  p.  6,  7.    Awdley's  case,  Latch.  124.    S.  C.  Poph.  176.    Fall  v.  Reg., 

2  G.  &  D.  804.     And  see  Burr." 729  ;  1  Sid.  410 ;  1  Vent.  II ;  2  Salk.  432  ;  Stra.  58. 
See  post,  tit.  "  Action  for  false  return." 

[c)  Enfield  v.  Hills,  2  Lev.  236,  238.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor), 3  B.  &  Ad.  276,  279.1 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6. 

[d )  See  ante,  p.  335,  336,  and  post,  tit.  "  Action,  &c.  for  false  return." 

[e)  Ante,  p.  7,  n.  {(),  (u).  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  279, f  per  Lord 
Tenterden,  C.  J.  Kynaston  v.  Shrewsbury,  Stra.  1051.  R.  v.  Trinity  Chapel  (Dean), 
8  Mod.  28.  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  99  b. ;  Bull.  N.  P.  204;  Bac.  Abr'  tit  "  Man."  (K.) 
As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  App. 

(/)  See  stat.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9  k  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App.,  which  ex- 
tends the  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  to  Ireland.  As  to  returns  by  way  of  traverse,  see 
ante,  p.  348—351. 

As  to  traverses  in  general  see  the  several  subjects  of  the  alphabetical  seriesand 
p.  194. 

(ff)  See  stat.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2  c.  12  App.  See  post,  tit. 
"Action,  &c.,  for  false  return." 

(A)  Ante,  p.  7,  n.  (u).    R.  v.  Swansea  (Corp.),  E.,  24  Geo.  3  ;  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  192. 

(i)  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  255,  276. f  But  see  R.  v.  London  (Mayor), 
16  L.  J.,  N.  S.  190,  Q.  B.,  where  the  Court,  after  judgment  on  demurrer,  suggested 
to  counsel  a  permission  to  traverse  the  return. 


PLEA,     ETC. 


423 


allow  a  return  to  be  traversed  after  it  lias  been  held  good  upon  demurrer,  (j") 
But  if  the  Court  quash  as  well  on  demurrer,  as  upon  motion,  part  of  a  re- 
turn to  a  mandamus,  which  consists  of  several  independent,  but  consis- 
tent matters,  some  of  which  are  sufficient,  and  others  not,  the  prosecutor 
may,  by  leave  of  the  Court,  traverse  the  subsisting  part  of  such  return. (7c) 
The  Court  has  not,  however,  yet  settled,  to  what  extent  a  traverse  to  a 
return  will  be  allowed,  after  it  has  been  held  good  on  demurrer;  at  all 
events,  the  rule  as  to  not  allowing  a  traverse  after  a  demurrer,  has  no  ap- 
plication where  the  Court  has  simply  refused,  on  motion,  to  order  a  return 
to  be  taken  off  the  file;  for  an  argument  and  ruling  of  the  Court  on  motion, 
does  not  put  the  case  into  the  same  state  as  if  there  had  been  judgment  on 
demurrer.(^)  In  one  case,  however,  counsel,  before  filing  a  traverse  to  the 
defendant's  return,  applied  for  leave  to  take  the  opinion  of  the  Court 
afterwards,  on  concilium,  as  to  the  other  parts  of  the  return,  if  it  should 
be  necessary,  to  which  the  Court  assented,  saying,  it  thought  the  applica- 
tion quite  reasonable.  (?») 

The  prosecutor  may  obtain  time  to  plead,  &e.,  as  in  an  action  on  the 
case  for  a  false  return. («.) 

.]     Rule  to  plead. — One  side  bar  rule  to  plead  only  need  be  given, 

(so  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  give  any  peremptory  rule) ;  such  rule  may 
be  drawn  up  and  be  served  as  well  in  Term  as  in  Vacation,  and  expires 
in  ten  days  after  service  thereof. (o) 

.]     Enforcing  Plea. — If  the  defendant  have  both  formally  and 

substantially  answered  the  prosecutor's  writ,  it  may  be  that  the  prosecutor 
will  lie  by,  and  will  neither  obtain  time  to  plead,  nor  within  a  *rea-  p-f-qnc-, 
sonable  time(p)  take  the  necessary  steps  to  come  to  an  issue;"-  -' 
the  defendant  therefore  should,  if  he  have  not  filed  a  rule  to  plead,  and 
he  be  desirous  to  bring  the  matter  before  the  Court,  move,  under  stat. 
1  Wm.  4  c.  21,  s.  6,  or  as  to  Ireland,  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  5,  for  a 
rule  to  show  cause  why  the  prosecutor  should  not  pay  the  costs  of  opposing 
the  issuing  of  the  writ  of  mandamus  and  of  the  return,  and  proceed  in  the 
prosecution  of  the  writ.  The  rule,  if  obtained,  is  brought  on  as  an  ordi- 
nary rule,  and  the  Court  will,  after  having  heard  it  discussed,  decide  be- 
tween the  parties ;  if  the  prosecutor  have  not  been  guilty  of  laches,  the 
Court  will  discharge  the  rule  ;  but  if  he  have,  it  will  either  make  it  abso- 

(y)  Per  Denman,  C.  J.,  ia  R.  v.  Payn,  3  P.  &  D.  C23.  S.  C.  11  A.  &  E.  955.f  S. 
C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  285,  Q.  B. 

(k)  Ante,  p.  360,  n.  (o),  3'74,  n.  (/).  R.  v.  North  Midland  Railway,  3  P.  &  D.  G22. 
S.  C.  2  Rail.  Cas.  1.  S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  287,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  11  A.  &  E.  955,t  n.  (6). 
R.  V.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  45G.  R.  v.  Loudon  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  255.f 
Burr.  2008.     R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  66. 

(I)  R.  V.  Payn,  3  P.  &  D.  623.  S.  C.  11  A.  &  E.  955,f  and  cases  there  cited.  S.  C. 

9  L.  J.,  N.  S.,  285,  Q.  B.     S.  G.  2  Rail.  Cas.  1.     S.  C.  1  Jur.  54. 

(?«)  R.  T.  Manchester,  &c.  Railway,  H.  T.  1840.     11  A.  &  E.  956,t  n. 
(?z)  See  App.  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  6,  extended  by  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  to  writs 
of  mandamus  in  all  cases.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.   19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  s.  6.  and  9  k 

10  Vict.  c.  113. 

(o)  Cr.  Off.  RuL,  r.  17.     See  Rules,  App.     See  ante,  p.  298,  n.  {w). 
\p)  R.  V.  Swansea  (Corp.),  E.  24  Geo.  3,  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  192. 


424  tatping's    mandamus. 

lute  unconditionally,  or  impose  terms  upon  the  prosecutor.  Thus,  in  a 
case,  where  on  the  16th  November,  1841,  a  rule  nisi  for  a  mandamus  was 
obtained,  which  was  made  absolute  on  the  17th  April,  1842,  and  a  return 
filed  on  the  14th  May  following  ;  after  which  the  prosecutor  took  no  fur- 
ther steps  down  to  the  following  November,  and  then,  upon  application, 
refused  to  pay  the  costs  of  the  proceedings ;  the  Court  ordered  the  pro- 
secutor to  pay  the  costs  of  the  writ,  unless  by  the  first  day  of  the  follow- 
ing Term,  he  proceeded  to  traverse  or  impeach  the  legal  validity  of  the 
return.  (2) 

.]     Form  0/  Flea. — If  the  prosecutor  wish  to  deny  any  matters  of 

fact,  falsely  alleged  in  the  return,  such  end  is  accomplished  by  traversing 
them  ;(;•)  or  if  he  wish  to  confess  and  avoid  them,  that  is  done  by  a  plea 
or  pleas,  ending  with  a  verification. (.s)  The  prosecutor  may,  however, 
traverse  one  part  of  the  writ,  and  plead  specially  to  the  other. (^) 

The  statute  of  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  provides,  that  such  plea  or  traverse 
shall  be  the  same  as  if  the  prosecutor  had  brought  his  action  on  the 
case  for  a  false  return. (m)     As,  therefore,  the   proceedings   subsequent 
„   .,  *to  the  return  are  thus  assimilated  to  those  of  a  personal  action,  so 
^  the  pleas  must  be  framed  strictly  in  accordance  with  the   rules  of 

pleading  which  govern  the  legal  formulaj  in  such  actions,  in  order  that  the 
defendant  may  be  enabled  to  take  and  raise  proper  issues.  (  v)  So,  it  has  been 
held  since  the  above  statutes,  that  an  admission  in  one  plea,  cannot  be 
read  in  favour  of,  or  against  a  particular  fact  alleged  in  another.(M-)  Also, 
that  those  facts  of  a  return  or  other  pleading,  not  traversed  or  otherwise 
pleaded  to,  are  admitted. (x)  And  that  the  prosecutor  is  estopped  from 
denying  that  the  defendants  are  a  corporation,  if  he  so  style  them  by  the 

(q)  See  ante,  p.  306,  307.  R.  v.  Dartmouth  (Mayor),  2  D.,  N.  S.  980.  S.  C.  12 
L.  J.,  N.  S.  83,  M.  C.    R.  v.  Swansea  (Corp.),  E.  24  Geo.  3,  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  192. 

[r)  10  A.  &  E.  558.f  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  48,  ante,  347.  S.  0.  1  Rail.  Cas.  509.  See 
tit.  "  Return"  (Traverse),  p.  348. 

Is)  R.  V.  Pembroke  (Churchwardens),  5  A.  &  E.  GOS.f  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  69-1  R.  v. 
Brancaster  (Churchwardens),  7  A.  &  E.  459.1  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  580.  See  ante,  tit. 
"  Return"  (Confession  and  Avoidance),  p.  347,  351 — 362. 

(t)  See  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21  (E.),  and  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12, 
and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113  (I.),  App.  R.  v.  Darlington  School,  6  Q.  B.  682,  707.t  S. 
C.  14  L.J.,N.  S.  67,  Q.  B. 

(u)  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6.  So  that  all  special  pleas  (or  those  in  confession 
and  avoidance),  must  be  signed  by  counsel,  and  if  it  be  intended  to  plead  two  or 
more  to  the  same  part  of  the  return,  a  rule  to  plead  several  matters  must  be  ob- 
tained. See  stats.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21  (E.),  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12  (I.),  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c. 
113  (I.),  App. 

(v)  Ante,  p.  8,  n.  (y),  383,  n.  (r).  R.  v.  Brancaster,  7  A.  &  E.  460-1  S.  C.  2  N. 
&  P.  580.  R.  V.  York  (Mayor),  3  Q.  B.  SSO.f  S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  584.  R.  v.  Todmor- 
den  (Overseers),  4  P.  &  D.  553.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  185,f  where  see  forms  of  pleas,  &c. 
See  stats  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2  and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21. 

As  to  obtaining  time  to  plead,  see  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  6  (E.)  As  to  Ireland, 
Stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  s.  6,  App. 

(«•)  R.  V.  Smith,  1  D.  &  M.  578.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  eu.f  R.  v.  Gaskin,  8  T.  R.  210. 
R.  T.  Griffiths,  5  B.  &  A.  731.t 

(x)  R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  9  B.  &  C.  20,f  where  see  form  of  an  entry  of  a  tra- 
Terse.     S.  C.  4  M.  &  R.  46. 


PLEA,     ETC.  425 

direction  of  his  writ ;  therefore  they  need  not,  in  their  return,  shew  what 
manner  of  corporation  they  are.(v/) 

.]     Filmg. — If  pleas  have  been  for  any  cause  improperly  filed,  a 

motion  should  be  made  to  take  them  off  the  file.(s)  As  to  taking  pleas  off 
the  file,  see  ante,  p.  331,  365—367. 

.]      WitMraioal  of  Plea.—'I\iQ  practice  as  to  withdrawal  of  pleas 

is  the  same  as  in  personal  actions.  But  upon  demurrer  to  a  plea  to  return, 
the  Court  refused  an  application  to  allow  it  to  be  withdrawn,  in  order  that 
the  question  might  be  argued  on  the  re  turn,  (a) 

.]     Jmhjment  hy  Default. — In  case  no  plea,  replication,  rejoinder, 

joinder  in  demurrer,  joinder  in  error,  or  other  pleading,  shall  be  entered 
on  the  expiration  of  the  time  limited  by  the  rule  to  plead,  &c.,  judgment 
as  for  want  of  such  pleading  may  be  signed  at  the  opening  of  the  office  on 
the  next  following  morning,  unless  any  order  of  the  Court,  or  of  a  Judge, 
extending  such  time,  shall  have  been  obtained  and  served,  and  in  such 
case  judgment  shall  not  be  signed  until  the  day  after  the  expiration  of  the 
time  granted  by  such  order. (i) 

Judgment  is  signed  at  the  Crown  Office,  and  there  entered ;  a  roll  should 
be  obtained,  and  the  proceedings  entered  thereupon,  as  in  ordinary  cases  : 
a  number  must  be  obtained  for  it ;  after  which  it  should  be  carried  in,  if 
it  be  intended  that  it  shall  be  the  foundation  of  ulterior  proceedings,  (r) 
The  Court  will,  however,  on  an  application  ^supported  by  special  j-^^gg^-, 
affidavits  accounting  for  the  delay,(((')  upon  terms  set  aside  such  L 
judgment,  as  in  the  case  of  a  personal  action. 

.]     Demurrer  to  Prosecutor's  Plea,  Replication,  Rejoinder,  &c. — 

The  Stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  after  empowering  the  person  or  persons 
suing  or  prosecuting  the  writ  of  mandamus,  to  plead  to,  or  traverse,  all  or 
any  the  material  facts  contained  within  the  said  return,  also  empowers 
the  person  or  persons  making  such  return,  to  reply,  take  issue,  or  demur; 
and  such  further  proceedings,  and  in  such  manner,  for  the  determination 
thereof,  as  might  have  been  had,  if  the  person  or  persons  suing  such  writ 
had  brought  his  or  their  action  on  the  case  for  a  false  return. (e) 

As  to  allowing  time  to  reply,  rejoin,  &c.,  see  stat.  9  Ann.  c  20,  s.  6, 
extended  by  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21 ;  also,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  s.  6,  and 

9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113  (I.),  App.  and  ante,  p.  386,  n.  {v). 

.]     Rules  to  reply,  &c. — One  side  bar  rule  only  to  rej^ly,  rejoin, 

join  in  demtcrrer,  &c.,  need  be  given ;  which   shall  be   drawn   up  and 

(y)  Ante,  p.  319,  n.  (I).     R.  v.  Halse,  1  Keb.  20.     R.  v.  Slytbe,  9  D.  &  R.  229.t 

(z)  See  ante,  p.  367,  n.  (/).  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  215.\  See  ante, 
p.  365,  "Return"  (Filing). 

(a)  R.  V.  Yorlv  (Mayor),  6  Jur.  1082. 

(6)  Crown  Off.  Rules,  r.  19,  App. 

(c)  See  infra,  "Entry  of  Proceedings,"  p.  395,  396. 

Id)  R.  V.  Swansea  (Corp.),  E.  24  Geo.  3,  Gude's  Cr.Pr.  192. 

(e)  This  Stat,  of  9  Ann.  c.  20,  is  extended  to  writs  of  mandamus  in  all  cases  by 
Stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  for  which,  together  with  the  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  & 

10  Vict.  c.  113,  relating  to  Ireland,  see  App. 


42G  tatping's    mandamus. 

served,  (and  no  peremptory  rule  given  thereon),  and  which  rules  shall,  in 
all  cases,  expire  in  four  days  next  after  service  thereof.(y') 

If  a  replication,  or  rejoinder,  or  joinder  in  demurrer,  be  not  filed  in 
accordance  with  the  above  rule,  judgment  by  default  may  be  signed  ;(^) 
and  damages  or  costs,  or  costs  alone,  as  the  case  may  be,  may  be  obtained 
by  writ  of  in(|uiry,  or  otherwise,  as  in  an  action  on  the  case  for  a  false 
return. (/() 

.]     Issue. — Joining  issue  in  fact,  is  warranted  by  stat.  9  Ann.  c. 

i-^.oQo-|  20,  s.  2,  and  is  thereby  declared  to  be  the  same  as  in  an  action  on 
*the  case  for  a  false  return  ;(t)  except  in  cases  within  the  stat.  1 
"\Vm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4,  which  enacts,  that  the  Court  of  B.  R.  will  direct  who 
shall  join  issue,  and  in  whose  name  the  proceedings  shall  be  carried  on.(i) 
A  complete  copy  of  the  issue  need  not  be  delivered,  if  the  whole  of  the 
pleadings  have  been  separately  delivered. (/) 

.]     Notice  of  Trial. — The  form,  &c.  of  the  notice  of  trial  is  the 

same  as  that  of  such  a  notice  in  a  personal  action.  Although  by  stat.  9 
Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  the  prosecutor  of  a  mandamus,  to  which  there  is  a 
return,  and  issue  taken  on  the  facts  therein  alleged,  may  try  the  same  in 
such  place  as  an  issue  in  an  action  on  the  case  for  a  false  return  should 
or  might  have  been  tried,  yet  it  has  been  held,  that  if  all  the  material 
facts  are  alleged  in  one  county,  and  issue  taken  thereon  there,  the  prose- 
cutor cannot  issue  the  venire  facias  into  another  county,  though  he  might 
originally  have  alleged  the  facts  there,  and  have  there  brought  his  action 
for  a  false  return. (7t)     The  trial  may  also  be  had  at  the  sittings  of  Nisi 

(/)  Cr.  Off.  Rules,  r.  18,  App.     The  following  is  a  form  of  rule  :— 

" ,  the day  of ,  in  the year  of  the  reign  of  Queen  Victoria. 

(Venue). 

The  Queen  on  the  prosecution  of 
S.  B.  and  J.  E. 

Off  St. 

J.  W.  and  T.  C, 

Chapehvardens  of  B. 
Unless  the  defendants  shall  reply  to  the  pleas  to  the  return  of  the  said  defendants 
to  this  writ  of  mandamus,  within  four  days  next  after  service  of  this  rule  upon  the 
attorney  or  agent  for  the  said  defendants,  let  judgment  be  entered  for  the  said  pro- 
secutors against  the  said  defendants  for  want  of  a  replication. 

Side  Bar. 

By  the  Court." 

(fj)  Sec  Cr.  Off.  Rules,  r.  19,  App.  See  tit.  "Judgment  by  Default,"  ante,  p. 
386,  387,  and  tit.  "Return"  (Demurrer,  Joinder). 

(A)  See  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  and  1  \Vm.  4,  c.  21,  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see 
stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App.  See  tits.  "Damages,"  post, 
p.  392,  and  "  Costs,"  p.  394. 

(i)  See  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see 
stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 

(;•)  Corn.  Cr.  Pr.  232. 

(k)  R.  V.  Newcastle-upon-Tyne,  1  East,  115.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6.  But 
see  stat.  38  Geo.  3,  c.  52,  s.  1,  App..  which  empowers  the  Court  to  award  the 
venire  into  another  county  on  application  for  that  purpose. 

As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 


PLEA,     ETC.  427 

Prius  in  Middlesex,  in  wliieli  county  tlie  writ  is  issued,  or  at  tlic  assizes 
for  the  county  where  the  place  is  situate,  and  the  cause  originated. (Z) 

.]  Subpoena. — As  to  subpoena  for  witnesses,  it  must,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  late  rule,(??i)  be  tested  of  the  day  on  which  it  is  actually 
issued.  It  is  issued  at  the  Crown  Office.  The  service  is  the  same  as  in 
personal  actions. (;^) 

.]     Record. — The   record   is  made  up  by  the  party  who  gives 

notice  of  trial.  It  must  be  sealed  at  the  Seal  Office,  and  carried  in,  in 
like  manner  as  a  nisi  prius  record  in  a  personal  action. (o) 


*. 


•] 


Juri/  Process. — The  jury  process  is,  in  general,  the  r^toon-i 
same  as  in  personal  actions. (^;) 

It  was  always  the  practice  of  the  clerks  in  Court  at  the  Crown  Office, 
to  insert  in  the  jury  process  the  substance  of  the  issues  to  be  tried;  but 
since  the  conduct  of  the  proceedings  has,  by  virtue  of  stat.  G  Vict.  c.  20, 
devolved  upon  the  attorneys  of  the  Court  of  B.  R.  at  Westminster,  the 
issues  are  sometimes  very  shortly  expressed,  as  thus :  "  To  try  upon  their 
oath  the  several  issues  Joined  upon  the  return  to  our  writ  of  mandamus, 
directed  to,  &c.,  commanding  them  to,  <&c." 

The  writ  of  Venire  Facias  Juratores  must  be  tested  as  of  the  day  on 
which  issue  is  joined,  or  if  there  be  a  continuance,  on  the  day  of  the  last 
continuance,  previous  to  the  award  of  the  distringas  juratores,  and  must 
be  made  returnahle  either  on  a  day  certain,  or  immediately,  before  the 
Queen  at  Westminster,  either  in  the  same,  or  the  next  Term,  as  occasion 
may  require. (5') 

The  writ  of  Distringas  Juratores  must  be  tested  as  of  the  day  of  the 
return  of  the  venire  facias  juratores,  and  must  be   made  returnahle  on 

[I)  Glide's  Cr.  Pr.  187.  (m)  Cr.  Off.  Eules,  r.  3,  App. 

[n]  Chit.  Prac.  327—333. 

(o)  The  following  is  a  form  of  Nisi  Prius  Record,  as  given  in  Corner's  Cr.  Off. 
Forms,  p.  145. 
"  Pleas  before  our  Lady  the  Queen  at  Westminster  of \_thc  Ti-rm  of  the  return 

to  the  tvrit'\  Term,  in  the year  of  the  reign  of  our  Sovereign  Lady  Victoria, 

by  the  Grace   of  God,  of  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland, 

Queen,  Defender  of  the  Faith. 

Amongst  the  Pleas  of  the 
Queen  Roll. 
{County). 

Amongst  the  "j  Some  time  ago,  that  is  to  say,  \_on  the  day  of  the  Teste  of  the  Man- 
Records  of  this  Vdamus'],  our  Lady  the  Queen  sent  to  [the  direction  of  the  icrit'],  her 
Year,  No. — .     J  Writ,  close  in  these  words,  that  is  to  say: 

Victoria,  <fec.,  [to  the  end  of  the   Writ  of  Mandamus'].     On  which  said  day 

of ,  \_lhe  day  of  the  return  of  the  writ'],  in  this  same  Term,  before  our  said  Lady 

the  Queen  at  Westminster,  \_the  party  making  the  return]  returned  the  said  Avrit  as 
follows,  that  is  to  say,  [copy  the  return,  or,  when  ike  return  is  on  a  separate  Schedule, 
say],  the  execution  of  this  writ  appears  by  the  Schedule  hereunto  annexed,  the 

answer  of within  mentioned,  \_coj)ying  the  indorsement  on  the  writ],  which  said 

Schedule  is  as  follows,  that  is  to  say,  [^tlien  copy  the  return  as  on  the  Schedule,  and  the 
subsequent  pleadings  in  order.  The  J ury process  in  the  same  form  as  upon  Indictment 
with  Special  Issues,  except  that  the  name  of  the  Prosecutor  is  inserted  in  lieu  of  that  of  the 
Queen's  Coroner  and  Attorney]." 

[p)  Anon.,  2  Barn.  24.  Snook  v.  Southwood,  R.  &  M.  429.  See  stats.  9  Ann. 
c.  20,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  App.     See  Chit.  Prac.  342. 

(y)  See  Cr.  Off.  Rul.  r.  6,  App. 


428  tapping's    mandamus. 

a  day  certain  in  the  next  ensuing  Term,  before  the  Queen  at  West- 
minster. (/•) 

A  special  jury  may  be  obtained  as  in  personal  actions, 

.]  Trial. — A  trial  at  Bar  may  be  obtained  as  in  personal  ac- 
tions, (.s) 

The  trial  at  nisi  prius  of  issues  in  fact  in  a  mandamus  case,  does  not 
differ  from  the  trial  of  such  issues  in  a  personal  action.  Viva  voce  evi- 
dence(#)  must  be  adduced,  and  must  fully  support  the  issues  raised  for 
trial ;  and  no  other  issues  but  those  raised  can  be  tried. (») 

.]     Jeofails,  &c. — By  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  Q,{v)  the  stat.  4  Ann. 

c.  IG  (.Jeofails),  is  extended  to  writs  of  mandamus. 

P^oQA-i      * •]     Amendments. — The  remedial   stat.   9   Geo.  4,  c.  15, 

authorizing  the  amendment  at  the  trial,  of  variances  between  mat- 
ters in  writing  or  in  print  produced  in  evidence  and  the  record,  does  not, 
in  terms,  embrace  trials  on  writs  of  mandamus,  but  on  the  contrary  would 
seem  to  exclude  them. 

By  stat.  3  &  4  Wm.  4,  c.  42,  s.  28,  which  recites,  that  great  expense 
is  often  incurred,  and  delay  or  failure  of  justice  takes  place  at  trials,  by 
reason  of  variances(io)  as  to  some  particular  or  particulars  between  the 
proof  and  the  record,  and  setting  forth  on  the  record  or  document  on 
which  the  trial  is  had,  of  contracts,  customs,  prescriptions,  names,  and 
other  matters  or  circumstances  not  material  to  the  merits  of  the  ease,  and 
by  the  misstatement  of  which  the  opposite  party  cannot  have  been  pre- 
judiced ;  and  the  same  cannot  in  any  case  be  amended  at  the  trial,  except 
where  the  variance  is  between  any  matter  in  writing,  or  in  print  produced 
in  evidence,  and  the  record  ;  and  that  it  is  expedient  to  allow  such  amend- 
ments, as  thereinafter  mentioned,  to  be  made  on  the  trial  of  the  cause,  it 
is  enacted :  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  any  Court  of  Record,  holding  plea 
in  civil  actions,  and  any  Judge  sitting  at  Nisi  Prius,  if  such  Court  or 
Judge  shall  see  fit  so  to  do,  to  cause  the  record,  writ,  or  document,  on 
which  any  trial  may  be  pending  before  any  such  Court  or  Judge  in  any 
civil  action,  or  in  any  information  in  the  nature  of  a  quo  warranto,  or 
proceedings  on  a  mandamus,  when  any  variance  shall  appear  between  the 
proof  and  the  recital,  or  setting  forth  on  the  record,  writ,  or  document,  on 
which  the  trial  is  proceeding,  of  any  contract,  custom,  prescription,  name, 
or  other  matter,  in  any  particular  or  particulars  in  the  judgment  of  any 
such  Court  or  Judge,  not  material  to  the  merits  of  the  ca.se,  and  by  which 
the  opposite  party  cannot  have  been  prejudiced  in  the  conduct  of  his  ac- 
tion, prosecution,  or  defence,  to  be  forthwith  amended  by  some  ofScer  of 

(r)  See  Cr.  Off.  Pail.  r.  7,  App. 

(s)  Anon.,  2  Barn.  lOG.     See  Chit.  Prac.  357—360,  8th  edit. 

(?)  Stevenson  v.  Newenson,  Ld.  Raym.  1353;  Stra.  583;  1  Doug.  83.  Smith  v. 
Armourers  and  Braziers'  Company,  Peake  X.  P.O.  199. 

{u)  Vaughan  v.  Lewis.  Carth.  229. 

{v)  App.  See  also  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  App.,  and  as  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2, 
c.  12,  s.  16,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 

(w)  In  the  act  this  word  is,  by  mistake,  "  vacancies." 


PLEA,     ETC.  429 

the  Court,  or  otherwise,  both  in  the  jwrt  of  the  pleading  where  such  vari- 
ance occurs,  and  in  every  other  part  of  the  pleadings  which  it  may  become 
necessary  to  amend,  on  such  terms  as  to  payment  of  costs  to  the  other 
party,  or  postponing  the  trial  to  be  had  before  the  same  or  another  jury, 
or  both  payment  of  costs  and  postponement,  as  such  Court  or  Judge  shall 
think  reasonable ;  and  in  case  such  variance  shall  be  in  some  particular 
or  particulars  in  the  judgment  of  such  Court  or  Judge,  not  material  to 
the  merits  of  the  case,  but  such  as  that  the  other  party  may  have  been 
prejudiced  thereby  in  the  conduct  of  his  action,  prosecution,  or  defence, 
then  such  Court  or  Judge  shall  have  power  to  cause  the  same  to  be 
amended,  upon  payment  of  costs  to  the  other  party,  and  withdrawing 
*the  record,  or  postponing  the  trial,  as  aforesaid,  as  such  Court  or  r:jcoqi-| 
Judge  shall  think  reasonable,  and  after  any  such  amendment,  the 
trial  shall  proceed ;  in  case  the  same  shall  be  proceeded  with  in  the  same 
manner  in  all  respects,  both  with  respect  to  the  liability  of  the  witnesses  to 
be  indicted  for  perjury,  and  otherwise,  as  if  no  such  variance  had  appear- 
ed. And  in  case  such  trial  shall  be  had  at  Nisi  Prius,  or  by  virtue  of 
such  writ,  as  aforesaid,  the  order  for  the  amendment  shall  be  indorsed  on 
the  postea,  or  the  writ,  as  the  case  may  be,  and  returned  together  with 
the  record  or  writ ;  and  thereupon  such  papers,  rolls,  and  other  records  of 
the  Court  from  which  such  record  or  writ  is  issued,  as  it  may  be  neces- 
sary to  amend,  shall  be  amended  accordingly ;  and  in  case  the  trial  shall 
be  had  in  any  Court  of  Record,  then  the  order  for  amendment  shall  be 
entered  on  the  roll,  or  other  document,  upon  which  the  trial  shall  be  had, 
provided  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  any  party  that  shall  be  dissatisfied 
with  the  decision  of  such  Judge  at  Nisi  Prius,  sheriff,  or  other  officer, 
respecting  his  allowance  of  any  such  amendments,  to  apply  to  the  Court 
from  which  such  record  or  writ  issued,  for  a  new  trial,  upon  that  ground; 
and  in  case  any  such  Court  shall  think  any  such  amendment  improper,  a 
new  trial  shall  be  granted  accordingly  on  such  terms  as  the  Court  shall 
think  fit,  or  the  Court  shall  make  such  other  order  as  to  them  may  seem 
meet. 

Also  by  sect.  24,  it  is  enacted :  that  the  said  Court  or  Judge  shall  and 
may,  if  they  or  he  think  fit,  in  all  such  cases  of  variance,  instead  of 
causing  the  record  or  document  to  be  amended  as  aforesaid,  direct  the 
jury  to  find  the  fact  or  facts  according  to  the  evidence,  and  thereupon 
such  finding  shall  be  stated  on  such  record  or  document;  and  notwith- 
standing the  finding  on  the  issue  joined,  the  said  Court,  or  the  Court  from 
which  the  record  has  issued,  shall,  if  they  think  the  said  variance  imma- 
terial to  the  merits  of  the  case,  and  the  misstatement  such  as  could  not 
have  prejudiced  the  opposite  party  on  the  conduct  of  the  action  or  defence, 
give  judgment  according  to  the  very  right  and  justice  of  the  case.  And 
by  sect.  25,  it  is  enacted :  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  parties  in  any 
action  or  information  after  issue  joined,  by  consent,  and  by  order  of  any 
of  the  Judges  of  the  said  superior  Courts,  to  state  the  facts  of  the  case  in 
the  form  of  a  special  case  for  the  opinion  of  the  Court,  and  to  agree  that 


430  tapping's   mandamus. 

a  judgment  shall  be  entered  for  the  plaintiff  or  defendant  by  confession, 
or  of  nolle  prosequi  immediately  after  the  decision  of  the  case,  or  other- 
wise, as  the  Court  may  think  fit,  and  a  judgment  shall  be  entered  accord- 
ingly, (x) 

The  Judge  on  the  trial  may  reserve  leave  to  move  to  enter  a 
I-  *^-^  verdict  *as  in  personal  actions, (y)  and  a  motion  for  that  purpose 
may  be  made  accordingly,  (z) 

.]     Verdict. — If  cither  a  verdict,  or  a  judgment  on  demurrer,  by 

nil  dicit,  or  for  want  of  replication,  or  other  pleading,  be  given  for  the 
prosecutor,  he  shall  recover  damages  and  costs  as  he  might  in  an  action 
on  the  case  for  a  false  return,  to  be  levied  by  ca.  sa.,  fi.  fa.,  or  elegit; 
also,  he  shall  have  granted  to  him  a  peremptory  writ  of  mandamus  with- 
out delay,  as  may  be  if  the  return  be  adjudged,  on  "  motion  to  quash"  or 
"demurrer,"  insufficient  in  law. (a) 

If,  however,  judgment  be  for  the  defendant,  he  shall  recover  costs,  to 
be  levied  as  aforesaid;  but  if  such  judgment  be  against  him,  he  shall  not 
be  liable  to  be  sued  in  another  action  for  such  return.  (&) 

.]     Damages. — The  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  (extended  by  stat.  1 

Wm.  4,  c.  21),  provides  as  to  Damages,  that  in  case  a  verdict  shall  be 
found  for  the  prosecutor,  or  judgment  given  for  him  upon  demurrer,  or 
by  nil  dicit,  or  for  want  of  a  replication  or  other  pleading,  he  shall  reco- 
ver his  damages  and  costs  in  such  manner  as  he  might  have  done  in  an 
action  on  the  case  for  a  false  return,  such  costs  and  damages  to  be  levied 
by  ca.  sa.,  fi.  fa.,  or  elegit. (<•) 

It  has  been  held,  that  where  a  jury  which  had  tried  traverses  under 
stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  omitted  to  find  damages,  the  Court  could  neither 
award  judgment,  nor  direct  a  writ  of  inquiry  for  the  purpose  of  assessing 
them,  but  would  direct  a  venire  de  novo,((/)  or  an  action  for  the  damages 
might  be  brought ;  because,  as  by  such  statute,  the  traverses  there  men- 
tioned are  given  in  the  stead  of  an  action  for  a  false  return,  and  as  in 
such  action  it  cannot  be  said,  that  the  damages  are  collateral,  so  neither 
can  it  be  said,  that  they  are  collateral  in  a  proceeding  under  the  statute 

(x)  See  tit.  "  Special  Case/'  post,  p.  411. 

(V)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras  (Parish),  7  A.  &  E.  V52.t     S.  C.  5  D.  722. 
(z)  R.  V.  Baldwin,  8  A.  &  E.  947,  949.f     S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  124;  3  B.  &  Ad.  279,t 
per  Lord  Tenterdcn,  C.  J. 

[a)  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6.  See  also  R.  v.  Kelk,  1  G.  &  D.  131.  S.  C.  1 
Q.  B.  C60  ;f  2  Tidd,  997,  9th  ed.,  citing  R.  v.  Glamorgan  (Mayor),  2  Smith,  8, 
where  poundage  was  held  to  be  recoverable  as  in  personal  actions.  See  stats.  9 
Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c. 
12,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 

[b)  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  6.  See  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c. 
21,  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 
See  infra,  "  Damages." 

[c)  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  s.  2,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  2, 
App. 

{d)  Kvnaston  v.  Shrewsbury  (Mayor),  Cas.  temp.  Hard.  295.  S.  C.  Stra.  1052. 
S.  C.  7  Bro.  P.  C.  396  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  199,  203.  R.  v.  Fall,  1  Q.  B.  640.t  S.  C.  1  G. 
&  D.  1 1 7.  S.  C.  5  Jur.  886.  S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  145,  Q.  B.  j  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man." 
D.  6  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (K.) 


PLEA,    ETC.  431 

for  they  are  consequent  and  dependent  upon  tlie  issue,  and  the  jury  arc 
*to  inquire  of  damages  as  parcel  of  the  charge.  But  such  doctrine  r^-.^Qo-i 
has  been  held  not  to  extend  to  a  traverse  under  stat.  1  AYm.  4,  c.  •-  -* 
21,  s.  3,  which  extends  the  provisions  of  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  to  all  writs 
of  mandamus,  and  entitles  prosecutors  who  recover  on  a  traverse  to  dam- 
ages and  costs,  whether  or  not  they  are  so  interested  as  to  be  entitled  to 
sue  in  "case"  for  a  false  return. (e)  But  where  a  jury  omitted  to  find 
damages  on  a  traverse,  it  was  held,  that  the  Judge  who  tried  the  cause 
might  order  from  his  recollection  the  verdict  to  be  entered  on  the  postea 
for  nominal  damages,  though  the  associate's  indorsement  on  the  nisi  prius 
record,  was  only,  "  Verdict  for  the  Crown,"  the  entry  of  nominal  dam- 
ages in  such  case  being  quite  of  course,  and  entirely  a  matter  of  form  in 
which  the  jur}^  could  not  exercise  any  discretion. (/) 

The  statute  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  3,  like  that  of  9  Ann.  c.  20,  was  not 
intended  to  interfere  with  the  common  law  right  of  parties  to  damages, 
but  its  sole  object  was  to  extend  the  provisions  of  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20, 
with  regard  to  the  mode  of  enforcing  those  rights. ( (7)  Thus,  by  stat.  1 
Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4,  it  is  recited,  that  as  writs  of  mandamus,  other  than 
such  as  relate  to  the  offices  and  franchises  mentioned  in  or  provided  for 
by  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  arc  sometimes  issued  to  officers  and  other  per- 
sons, commanding  them  to  admit  to  offices,  or  do  or  perform  other  matters 
in  respect  whereof  the  persons  to  whom  such  writs  are  directed,  claim  no 
right  or  interest,  or  whose  functions  are  merely  ministerial  in  relation  to 
such  offices  or  matters  and  it  maybe  proper  that  such  officers  and  persons 
shall  in  certain  cases  be  protected  against  the  payment  of  damages  or  costs 
to  which  they  may  otherwise  become  liable,  it  is  therefore  enacted,  that 
it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Court  to  which  application  may  be  made  for  any 
writ  of  mandamus  other  than  such  as  relate  to  the  said  offices  and  fran- 
chises mentioned  in  or  provided  for  by  the  said  act  9  Ann.  c.  20,  if  such 
Court  shall  see  fit  so  to  do  to  make  rules  and  orders,  calling  not  only  upon 
the  person  to  whom  such  writ  may  be  required  to  issue,  but  also  all  and 
every  other  person  having  or  claiming  any  right  or  interest  in  or  to  the 
matter  of  such  writ,  to  shew  cause  against  the  issuing  of  such  writ  and 
payment  of  costs  of  the  application,  and  upon  the  appearance  of  such  other 
person  in  compliance  with  such  rules,  or  in  default  of  appearance  after 
service  thereof  to  exercise  all  such  powers  and  authorities,  and  make  all 
such  rules  and  ^orders  applicable  to  the  case  as  are  or  may  be  given  ^.^ 
or  mentioned  by  or  in  any  act  passed,  or  to  be  passed  during  this  ^  J 
present  session  of  Parliament  for  giving  relief  against  adverse  claims  made 
upon  persons  having  no  interest  in  the  subject  of  such  claims,  provided 
always  that  the  return  to  be  made  to  any  such  writ,  and  issues  joined  in 

(e)  1  Q.  B.  648,1  supra,  n.  [d).  See  stats.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9  &  10 
Vict.  c.  113,  App. 

(/)  R.  V.  Fall,  1  Q.  B.  GSG.f  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  117.  S.  C.  5  Jur.  88G.  S.  C.  10 
L.  J.,  N.  S.  145,  Q.  B. 

[ff)  Fall  V.  R.,  2  G.  &  D.  806.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  GSG.f  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  18T,  Q. 
B.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 


432  tapping's    mandamus. 

fact  or  in  law  upon  any  traverse  thereof,  or  upon  any  demurrer,  shall  be 
made  and  joined  by  and  in  the  name  of  the  person  to  whom  such  writ 
shall  be  directed,  but  nevertheless  the  same  shall  and  may,  if  the  Court 
shall  think  fit  so  to  direct,  be  expressed  to  be  made  and  joined  on  the  be- 
half of  such  other  person  as  may  be  mentioned  in  such  rules,  and  in  that 
case  such  other  person  shall  be  permitted  to  frame  the  return,  and  conduct 
the  subsequent  proceedings  at  his  own  expense,  and  in  such  case  if  any 
judgment  shall  be  given  for  or  against  the  party  suing  such  writ,  such 
judgment  shall  be  given  against  or  for  the  person  or  persons  on  whose  be- 
half the  return  shall  be  expressed  to  be  made,  and  who  shall  have  the  like 
remedy  for  the  recovery  of  the  costs  and  enforcing  the  judgment,  as  the 
person  to  whom  the  writ  shall  have  been  directed  might  and  would  other- 
wise have  had.(/!) 

The  recovery  of  damages  on  an  issue,  raised  upon  the  return,  bars  an 
action  for  a  false  return. (i)  Thus,  by  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  8,  it  is  pro- 
vided, that  if  any  damages  shall  be  recovered  against  those  making  the 
return,  then  that  they  shall  not  be  liable  to  be  sued  in  any  other  action  or 
suit  for  making  such  return. Q') 

.]      Costs. — By  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  it  is  enacted ;  that  in 

case  a  verdict  shall  be  found  for  the  prosecutor,  or  judgment  given  for  him 
upon  a  demurrer,  or  by  nil  dicit,  or  for  want  of  a  replication  or  other 
pleading,  he  shall  recover  his  damages  and  costs  in  such  manner  as  he  might 
have  done  in  an  action  on  the  case  for  a  false  return,  such  costs,  &c.  to  be 
levied  by  ca.  sa.,  fi.  fa.,  or  elegit;  and  in  case  judgment  shall  be  given 
for  the  person  making  such  return  to  such  writ,  he  may  recover  his  costs 
of  suit  to  be  levied  in  manner  aforesaid. 

The  statute  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  3,  extends  the  provision  of  the  stat. 
9  Ann.  c.  20,  to  all  writs  of  mandamus,  and  prosecutors  are  thereby 
entitled  to  recover  damages  and  costs  as  in  an  action  for  a  false  return 
notwithstanding  they  have  neither  private  nor  particular  interests  in  the 
thing  commanded  to  be  done,  so  as  to  have  been  entitled  to  sue  for  a 
*false  return, (A-)  and  the  party  whether  prosecutor  or  defendant, 
L  -1  succeeding  on  an  issue  joined  upon  a  traverse  of  a  return  of  a 
madamus  under  the  above  statutes,  is  entitled  to  the  costs  of  the  applica- 
tion for  the  writ,  as  well  as  the  costs  of  the  subsequent  proceedings  with- 
out an  express  rule  of  Court  for  that   purpose. (/)     Where,  however,  a 

Ui)  As  to  Ireland,  see  a  similar  enactment,  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  3,  App. 

\i)  See  post,  tit.  "  False  Return,"  and  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  3,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c. 
21,  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  s.  3,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113, 
App.     See  ante,  p.  392,  n.  [b). 

(/)  See  stat.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113.  See  post,  tit. 
"Action,  &c.,  for  False  Return." 

(k)  Fall  V.  R.  (in  error),  2  G.  &  D.  803.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  GGO.f  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N. 
S.  187,  Q.  B.  R.  V.  Fall,  1  G.  &  D.  117.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  eSG.f  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  2 
D.,  N.  S.  955.  As  to  costs  general!}-,  see  tit.  "  Costs,"  post.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats. 
19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113.     See  ante,  p.  393. 

[1)  R.  V.  Fall,  1  G.  &  D.  117.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  633-1  S.  C.  5  Jur.  887.  R.  v.  Kelk, 
1  Q.  B.  660.t     S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.   127.     S.  C.  5  Jur.  888.     R.  v.  Newbury  (Mayor), 


PLEA,     ETC.  433 

prosecutor  has  a  verdict  on  some  only  of  several  issues  raised  upon  tra- 
verses to  a  return,  he  is  not  entitled  to  the  costs  of  the  issues  on  which 
he  has  succeeded,  either  under  stats.  4  Ann.  c.  16,  9  Ann.  c.  20,  or  R.  H., 
2  Wm.  4,  (I.)  74,  or  R.  H.,  4  Wm.  4,  7,  the  return  not  being  a  pleading 
in  the  cause.(«i) 

.     Judgment. ■^-Judgment  is  given  in  pursuance  of  the  verdict  in 

the  same  manner  as  a  judgment  after  verdict  in  a  personal  action. (?i)  So, 
it  may  like  such  a  judgment  be  amended,  quashed,  &c.(o)  A  rule  for 
judgment  must  not  be  given. Q?) 

.]     How  Signed. — In  all  cases  of  judgments  required  to  be  signed 

on  verdicts  given  at  nisi  prius,  the  postea  must  be  produced  at  the  Crown 
Office,  and  judgment  shall  in  four  days  next  after  return  of  the  distringas, 
or  at  any  subsequent  time  be  marked  thereon  by  one  of  the  Masters  or 
the  assistant  Master,  unless  a  rule  shall  have  been  granted  non  obstante 
veredicto,  or  to  arrest  judgment  in  eases  wherein  such  rules  may  by  the 
practice  of  the  Court  be  obtained. (r/)  In  other  cases  the  practice  is  as  in 
an  action  on  the  case  for  a  false  return. (r) 

.]     Untri/  of  Proceed ings,  and  Judgment  on  iJte  Roll. — Formerly 

it  was  not  the  practice  to  enter  the  proceedings  on  the  roll,  for  it  was  not 
till  12  Wm.  8,  that  a  rule  of  Court  was  made,  which  ordered  that  all 
proceedings  in  cases  of  mandamus  should  be  entered  of  the  same  p-j,oqp-i 
*term  they  came  in.(s)  But,  notwithstanding  this  rule,  it  was  not  L  ^  ^ 
usual  to  enter  up  judgment  on  the  return  of  a  mandamus,  except  in  those 
cases  in  which  peremptory  writs  issued ;(?)  so  that  prior  to  the  stat.  9  Ann. 
c.  20,  which  for  the  first  time  allowed  a  traverse  to  a  return,'  &c.,  such 
entry  could  be  of  little  practical  utility,  but  after  the  passing  of  that  sta- 
tute, when  traverses  became  frequent,  and  a  writ  of  error  thereon  could 
be  brought,  entries  also  became  frequent,  and  some  care  was  taken  in 
framing  them;(M)  also  as  since  the  passing  of  the  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c. 
0)1, {v)  the  prosecutor  may  demur  to  the  return  in  order  to  test  its  vali- 

11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  149,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  109.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  TBl.f  S.  C.  6  Jur. 
821. 

(m)  B.  T.  Malmesbnry  (Aldermen),  3  G.  &  D.  482.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  57 T.f  S.  C.  G 
Jur.  1107.     S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  318,  Q.  B.     See  Chit.  Prac.  p.  1377,  8th  edit. 

in)  R.  V.  Luton  Roads,  1  Q.  B.  8G0.t  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  250.  S.  0.  10  L.  J.  R., 
N.  S.,  Q.  B.  263.  R.  V.  Malmesbury  (Aldermen),  3  Q.  B.  577.t  S.  C.  3  G.  &  D. 
482.     S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  318,  Q.  B.     S.  C.  6  Jur.  1107. 

(o)  As  to  judgment  on  demurrer,  see  ante,  tit.  "  Return"  (Demurrer),  p.  380. 

As  to  judgment  by  default,  see  ante,  p.  380,  386. 

(/))  See  Cr.  Off.  Rul.  r.  21,  App.  {q)  See  Cr.  Off.  Rul.  r.  20,  App. 

(/■)  See  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see 
stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App.  See  ante,  p.  383,  n.  (e),  (/), 
387,  n.  (e),  392,  n.  [a). 

[s]  See  ante,  p.  2.  In  R.  v.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  539,  542,  Fortescue,  J.  (temp. 
9  Geo.  1),  says,  "entries  of  mandamuses  are  of  late  date;  perhaps  in  Ireland  they 
do  not  enter  them  yet."  See  form  of  entry  of  traverses  in  R.  v.  Fall,  1  Q.  B.  636. f 
S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  117.     S.  C.  5  Jur.  887. 

{t)  Enfield  v.  Hills,  2  Lev.  239.  See  a  form  of  entry  of  a  judgment,  1  P.  Wm^. 
351;  1  Q.  B.  649-1 

{u)  Stra.  542,  supra,  n.  (s). 

{v)  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  6,  App. 

June,  1852.— 28 


434  tatping's    mandamus. 

dity,  and  bring  a  writ  of  error  thereupon,  so  it  is  incumbent,  tbat  the 
writ,  return,  demurrer,  &c.,  be  entered  of  record  as  in  personal  actions, 
for  upou  a  demurrer  to  a  return  it  is  enacted,  by  sect.  1,  of  such  act, 
that  the  said  writ  and  return,  and  the  said  demurrer  shall  be  entered  up 
on  record. 

.]  IIow  entered. — The  entry  roll  of  the  judgment  should  be  com- 
pleted iu  accordance  with  the  postea  by  the  attorney  of  the  successful 
party,  and  when  the  costs  are  taxed,  the  amount  of  the  Master's  allocatur 
must  be  inserted  in  the  roll,  to  which  when  necessary,  a  number  will  be 
given  at  the  Crown  Office,  after  which  it  should  be  carried  to  the  inner 
treasury  department  of  the  Queen's  Bench  Office,  to  be  there  preserved 
amongst  the  records  of  the  Court. (?c)  It  would  seem,  that  in  accordance 
with  the  practice  in  personal  actions, (a:)  the  roll  need  not  be  carried  in 
at  once,  but  may  be  after  any  lapse  of  time.  It  must,  however,  be  so 
carried  in  before  it  can  be  used  for  the  purposes  of  evidence,  or  before  a 
writ  of  error  can  be  brought  upon  the  judgment. (?/) 

.]     Nunc  Pro  Tunc. — When  a  defendant  dies  before  judgment, 

leave  will  be,  on  a  proper  case,  given  to  enter  up  judgment  nunc  pro 
tunc.  (2) 

.]     As  in  Case  of  Nonsuit. — By  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  (extended  by 

stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21),  it  is  declared :  that  if  any  material  fact  contained 
in  a  return  to  a  mandamus  shall  be  traversed,  such  further  proceedings 
shall  be  had  thereupon,  as  if  an  action  had  been  brought  *for  a 
L  J  false  return ;  therefore,  when  the  case  is  ripe  for  such  a  step, 
judgment  as  in  case  of  a  nonsuit  may  be  obtained. (o) 

•.]     Non  Obstante    Veredicto. — Judgment  non  obstante  veredicto 

may  be  obtained,  as  in  personal  actions,(£)  on  behalf  of  either  party. (c) 

.]     3fotion  in  Arrest  of  Judgment. — There  may  be  a  motion   in 

arrest  of  judgment  as  in  the  case  of  personal  actions. (r/) 

.]  Motion  for  a  Neio  Trial. — A  rule  for  a  new  trial  may  be  moved 

for  misdirection,  &c.  as  in  personal  actions,  (e) 

(w)  Corner's  Cr.  Pr.  p.  236. 

{x)  See  Barrow  v.  Croft,  4  B  &  C.  888.7     S.  C.  6  D.  &  R.  SSe.f 

[y)  See  supra,  n.  [ic). 

(z)  Snook  V.  Mattock,  5  A.  &  E.  240,f  the  practice  on  this  point  being  identical 
with  that  in  civil  actions.     See  Chit.  Prac.  p.  460,  8th  edit. 

(a)Wigan  v.  Holmes,  Say.  110.  R.  v.  Scott  1  D.  &  L.  212.  R.V.Stafford 
(Mayor),  4  T.  R.  689 ;  3  T.  R.  661,  n.  {d)  ;  and  1  T.  R.  492,  n.  {d)  ;  3  B.  &  Ad. 
279, f  per  Ld.  Tenterden,  C.  J.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  & 
10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 

(6)  See  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  and  1  Wm.  4  c.  21.  R.  v.  Manchester  Railway,  3  G. 
&  D.  269.  S.  C.  3  Q.  B.  533,  533,f  where  see  form  of  entry ;  3  B.  &  Ad.  2T9,t  per 
■Lord  Tenterden,"  C.  J.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Yict. 
c.  113,  App. 

[c)  R.  V.  Darlington  School,  6  Q.  B.  682,  697.t  S.  C.  14  L.  J.,  X.  S.  67,  Q.  B., 
where  see  a  form  of  the  entry. 

{d)  Pees  V.  Leeds  (Mayor),  Stra.  640.  Buckley  v.  Palmer,  2  Salk.  431 ;  stats.  9 
Ann.  c.  20,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21 ;  3  B.  &  Ad.  279,f  per  Tenterden,  C.  J.  And  see  1 
East,  555.  See  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  And  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21  (E.),  and  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12, 
and  9  and  10  Yict.  c   113  (I.),  App. 

(c)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  7  A.  &  E.  752.f  See  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  and  1  Wm 
4,  c.  21,  (E.),  and  19  Geo.  2  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Yict.  c.  113  (I.)  App. 


PLEA,     ETC.  435 

.      Writ  of  Erro7\ — As  at  common  law,  a  writ  of  error  does  not 

lie,  except  upon  a  judgment,  or  on  an  award  in  the  nature  of  a  judgment; 
the  words,  of  the  writ  being,  '^  si  judicium  redditum  sit,"  &c.,(/)  so,  it 
was  at  an  early  period  held,  not  to  lie  to  review  the  decisions  or  judg- 
ments of  the  Court  of  B.  R.,  or  Courts  of  the  Counties  Palatine,  on  the 
award  of  peremptory  writs  of  mandamus,  consequent  upon  a  verdict  in  an 
action  for  a  false  return ;  because  there  was  no  record  upon  which  error 
could  be  brought,  it  being  a  mere  award  of  the  writ;((7)  and  it  was  also 
held  that  the  bringing  of  a  writ  of  error  in  such  a  case,  did  not  operate  as 
a  supersedeas  to  the  peremptory  writ.  (A) 

Afterwards,  by  the  stat.  9  Ann.  e.  20,  it  was  enacted,  amongst  other 
things,  that  in  certain  cases  therein  mentioned  (municipal  officers),  when 
*a  writ  of  mandamus  should  issue,  and  a  return  should  be  made  p...oQQ-i 
thereunto,  it  should  be  lawful  for  the  prosecutor  to  plead  to,  or  L  J 
traverse,  all  or  any  of  the  material  facts  contained  within  such  return,  to 
which  the  defendant  might  reply,  take  issue,  or  demur ;  and  such  further 
proceedings  in  such  manner  should  be  had  therein  for  the  determination 
thereof,  as  might  have  been  had  if  the  prosecutor  has  brought  his  action 
on  tlie  case  for  a  false  return.  In  such  cases,  therefore,  where  by  virtue 
of  the  statute  the  parties  resorted  to  pleadings,  a  writ  of  error  has  been 
held  to  lie,  if  the  case  were  put  in  a  proper  train  ;  because  they  then  as- 
sumed the  form  of  a  personal  action  in  which  judgment  and  costs  were 
given. (i).  Subsequently  by  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  the  above  provision  of 
the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  has  been  extended  to  writs  of  mandamus  in  all 
other  cases,  and  to  the  proceedings  thereon ;(_/)  and,  therefore,  by  virtue 
of  these  statutes,  error  can  be  brought  in  all  cases,  excepting  where  the 
prosecutor  avails  himself  of  his  common  law  remedy,  by  action  for  a  false 
return. 

Neither  of  the  above  acts  of  Parliament,  however,  gave  to  the  prose- 
cutor a  power  or  aixthority  to  demur  to  the  return  of  the  defendant,  in 
order  that  a  decision  upon  it  as  to  its  validity  could  be  reviewed  by  a 
Court  of  Error;  which  being  deemed  expedient,  and  that  a  certain  mode 
of  effecting  the  same  should  be  ordained  and  established,  it  is  by  stat.  6  & 

(/)  Co.  Litt.  288,  b.  Jacques  v.  Cesar,  2  Wms.  Saund.  101,  d,  n.  (1).  R.  v. 
York  (Mayor)  6  Jur.  1082. 

{g)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  287.  Dublin  (Dean)  v.  Dowgatt,  1  P.  TYms.  348.  R. 
v.  Trinity  Chapel  (Dean),  8  Mod.  27.  S.  C.  Stra.  536 ;  Fort.  329.  Dublin  (Dean), 
V.  R.  1  Bro.  P.  0.  73,  2nd  edit.  R.  v.  Hearle,  Stra.  625,  628.  S.  C.  3  Bro.  P.  C. 
178.  Kynaston  t.  Shrewsbury  (Mayor),  Stra.  1051.  St.  David's  (Ep.)  v.  Lacy,  Ld. 
Raym.  539,  545.  R.  v.  Clarke,  2  East,  79,  81.  R.  v.  Manchester  Railway,  3  Q.  B. 
539.1  S.  C.  3  a.  &  D.  269.  But  see  Dr.  Patrick's  case,  2  Keb.  259.  S.  C.  Sid. 
346,  pi.  12. 

{h)  Bull.  N.  P.  200  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (M.) 

{i)  See  ante,  p.  398,  n.  [y)  ;  6  N.  &  M.  512,t  n.  [b),  citing  R.  t.  M.anor,  3  N.  & 
M.  496.t  S.  C.  1  A.  &  E.  297  ;t  1  Bro.  P.  C.  73,  supra.  n.{g)]  Bull.  N.  P.  204. 
See  stat.  App.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  App. 

(/)  See  stat.  App.  R.  v.  Oundle  Manor,  1  A.  &  E.  283,  297.t  S.  C.  3  N.  t  M. 
484, f  and  cases  there  cited.     S.  C.  1  N.  &  M.  586.f     See  ante,  p.  7,  n.  («). 

The  stat.  of  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  does  not  apply  to  Ireland,  but  its  provisions  have 
been  substantively,  enacted  for  Ireland  by  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  6,  App. 


436  tapping's   mandamus. 

7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  !;(/»;)  enacted;  ttat  the  prosecutor  sliall  irapngn  the  va- 
lidity of  a  return  by  demurring  thereto,  and  by  obtaining  judgment  on 
such  demurrer. 

It  is  also  enacted  by  sect.  2  :  that  whenever  any  such  judgment  shall 
be  given,  or  whenever  issue  in  fact,  or  in  law,  shall  be  joined  upon 
any  pleading  in  pursuance  of  the  recited  acts  of  9  Ann.  c.  20,  and 
1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  or  either  of  them,  and  judgment  shall  be  given  thereon 
by  any  of  the  Courts  aforesaid,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  any  party  to  the 
record  in  any  such  cases,  who  shall  think  himself  aggrieved  by  such 
judgment,  to  sue  out  and  prosecute  a  writ  of  error,  for  the  purpose  of 
reversing  the  same,  in  such  manner  and  to  such  Court  or  Courts,  as 
a  party  to  any  personal  action  in  the  said  Court,  may  now  sue  out  and 
prosecute  a  writ  of  error  upon  the  judgment  in  such  action ;  and  such 
r*-^Qm  *'^'^'^^  ^^  ^i^^  proceedings  shall  thereupon  be  had  and  taken,  and 
such  costs  awarded,  as  in  ordinary  cases  of  writs  of  error  upon 
judgments  of  the  said  Courts  respectively  in  personal  actions;  and  if  the 
judgments  of  such  Court  be  reversed  by  the  Court  of  Error,  the  said 
Court  of  Error  shall  thereupon,  by  their  judgment,  not  only  reverse  the 
same,  but  shall  also,  in  addition  thereto,  give  the  same  judgment  which 
the  Court,  whose  judgment  is  so  reversed,  ought  to  have  given  in  that 
behalf;  and  if  by  their  said  judgment  they  shall  award  that  a  peremp- 
tory writ  of  mandamus  shall  issue,  the  same  shall  and  may  accordingly 
be  issued  by  the  proper  officer,  in  the  office  from  which  such  writs  issue, 
as  the  case  may  be,  upon  production  to  him  of  an  office  copy  of  the 
said  judgment  of  the  Court  of  Error,  which  shall  be  his  warrant  for  so 
doing. 

Provided  always,  that  bail  in  error,  to  the  amount  of  fifty  pounds,  or 
such  other  sum  as  may  be  by  any  rule  of  practice  thereafter  provided, 
shall  be  duly  put  in  within  four  days  after  the  allowance  of  the  said  writ; 
and  the  same  shall  afterwards  be  duly  perfected,  according  to  the  practice 
of  the  Court  wherein  the  said  original  judgment  was  given;  otherwise 
the  plaintiff  in  error  shall  be  deemed  to  have  abandoned  his  writ  of  error, 
and  the  same  shall  not  be  further  prosecuted. (?) 

It  is  also,  by  sect.  4,  enacted :  that  the  said  Courts  of  Error  may  and 
are  directed  to  make  from  time  to  time,  and  as  often  as  they  shall  see 
occasion,  such  rules  of  practice  in  reference  to  the  said  application,  and 
the  proceedings  thereon,  and  in  reference  to  the  writs  of  error  therein 
mentioned,  and  the  proceedings  thereon,  and  the  amount  of  bail  to  be 
taken,  as  the  said  Courts  respectively  may  deem  necessary  to  effi3Ctuate 
the  intention  of  the  act.  (•??() 

(A-)  See  stat.  App.  The  provisions  of  the  above  statute  have  been  substantively 
enacted  for  Ireland  by  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  6,  App. 

[I)  York  Railway  v.  Milner,  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  379,  Q.  B.,  is  a  case  of  error  under 
this  stat. 

(m)  No  rules  have  as  yet  been  drawn  up  under  this  power,  so  that  the  prac- 
tice of  error  in  cases  of  mandamus  is  governed  by  the  above  stat.  6  «&  7  Vict.  c. 
67,  s.  2. 


PLEA,     ETC,  437 

TLe  course  of  proceedings  ia  error  on  a  mandamus  are,  as  above 
stated,  assimilated  to  those  in  error  on  a  judgment  in  a  personal 
action.  (?i) 

,]     Joinder  in  Error. — There  must  he  only  one  side  bar  rule  to 

join  in  error,  which  must  be  drawn  up  and  served,  (and  no  peremptory 
rule  given  thereon ;)  it  expires  in  four  days  next  after  service,(o)  and  on 
default  being  made,  judgment  by  default  may  be  signed. (j>) 

Execution,  Writs  of.]     If  no  proceedings  in  error,  or  otherwise, 
*which  operate  as  a  stay  of  execution,  be  taken,  writs  of  execu-  r*  (qa-i 
tion  for  damages  and  costs,  or  costs  alone,  as  the  case  may  be, 
issue  as  in  personal  actions. 

As  to  execution  on  a  judgment  by  default,  see  ante,  p.  386,  stats.  9 
Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21  (E.),  App. ;  and  as  to  Ireland, 
stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 

As  to  execution  on  a  judgment  on  a  verdict,  see  ante,  p.  392. 

As  to  judgment  on  a  demurrer  to  a  return,  see  ante,  p.  380,  381,  392. 

Every  writ  of  execution  should  be  tested  as  of  the  day  on  which  it 
actually  issues,  and  may  be  made  returnable  either  on  a  day  certain  in 
Term,  or  immediately  after  the  execution  thereof;  and  the  party  suing 
forth  the  same,  must  indorse  thereon  the  place  of  abode  and  addition  of 
the  party  against  whom  the  same  is  issued,  or  such  other  description  of 
him  as  such  party  suing  out  such  writ  may  be  able  to  give.(2')  It  has 
been  held,  that  cases  of  mandamus  under  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  where  the 
parties  plead,  and  damages  and  costs  are  given,  are  actions  within  the 
statute  43  Geo.  3,  c.  46,  s.  5,  regulating  the  costs  of  writs  of  execution, 
and  the  indorsements  thereon. (r) 

Peremptory  Writ  op  Mandamus.]  What. — A  peremptory  man- 
damus is  not  a  judicial  writ  founded  upon  a  record,  but  a  mandatory 
Ma-it  which  the  Court  of  B.  K.  grants  when  it  is  satisfied  of  the  prosecu- 
tor's right. (s) 

.]      When  granted. — By  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2   (extended 

by  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  to  writs  of  mandamus  in  all  cases,)  it  is  enacted: 
that  where  any  mandamus  shall  issue  to  which  a  return  shall  be  made, 
and  upon  issue  joined  thereon  a  verdict  be  found  for  the  persons  suing 
such  mandamus,  or  judgment  be  given  for  them,  a  peremjjtory  mandamus 
shall  be  granted  without  delay,  as  if  the  return  had  been  adjudged  insuf- 
ficient in  law.(^<) 

[n)  R.  V.  Darlington  School,  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  67,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  6  Q.  B.  682,  TOT-f 
See  ante,  p.  397,  398. 

(o)  Cr.  Off.  Rul.  r.  18,  App. ;  the  joinder  need  not  be  signed  by  counsel. 

{p)  Cr.  OtF.  Kill.  r.  19;  and  see  ante,  tit.  "Judgment  by  default,"  p.  386. 

[q)  Cr.  Off.  Rul.  r.  10,  App. 

\r)  R.  V.  Glamorgan  (Mayor),  2  Smith,  8;  Chit.  Prac.  561,  562,  8th  edit. 

(s)  Foot  v.  Prowse,  Stra.  698 ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6. 

\t)  See  ante,  p.  7,  n.  (w) ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (M.)  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19 
Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 


438  tapping's    mandamus. 

By  tlic  subsequent  act  of  G  &  7  Vict.  c.  G7,  s.  1,  tlic  prosecutor  is 
empowered  to  object  to  the  validity  of  a  return  by  demurrer,  upon  which 
the  Court  is  also  empowered,  if  they  adjudge  that  the  return  is  not  valid 
in  law  to  award,  by  such  judgment,  a  peremptory  writ  shall  issue,  Tvhich 
may  be  sued  out  and  issued  accordingly,  at  any  time  after  four  days  from 
the  sifuing  of  such  judgment. («)  Also  by  sect.  2  of  the  same  statute, 
r*dOn  ^^  ^^  enacted  :  that  where  any  judgment  on  demurrer  to  a  *rcturn 
•-  shall  be  given,  or  whenever  issue  in  fact  or  in  law  shall  be  joined 

upon  any  pleadings,  in  pursuance  of  the  acts,  or  either  of  them,  recited 
in  such  act  of  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  G7,  and  judgment  shall  be  given  thereon,  it 
shall  be  lawful  for  any  party  to  the  record  in  any  of  such  cases  who  shall 
think  himself  aggrieved  by  such  judgment,  to  sue  out  and  prosecute  a 
writ  of  error ;  upon  the  determination  of  which  the  Court  of  Error  is 
empowered  to  award  a  peremptory  writ  of  mandamus,  which  shall  and 
may  accordingly  be  issued  by  the  proper  officer  in  the  office  from  which 
such  writs  issue,  upon  production  to  him  of  an  office  copy  of  the  said 
judgment  of  the  Court  of  Error,  which  shall  be  his  authority  and  war- 
rant for  so  doing,  (z;) 

As  in  many  cases  it  is  discretionary  with  the  Coiu't  whether  it  will  or 
not  grant  the  rule  nisi  for  the  writ,  so  whether  or  not  a  peremptory  man- 
damus shall  issue,  is  in  such  cases  also  entirely  within  its  discretion  ;(?/■) 
such  discretion  must  be,  however,  honestly  exercised,  that  is,  agreeably 
with  justice,  and  as  the  interests  of  the  parties  litigant  seem  to  require.(x) 
Thus,  where  there  appears  to  be  the  least  right  for  the  plaintiff,  a  peremp- 
tory mandamus  should  be  awarded. (?/)  So  the  Court  will  direct  a  peremp- 
tory mandamus,  though  part  of  the  return  be  unanswered,  if  such  part  be 
immaterial  or  afford  no  answer  to  the  writ  ;(.r)  but  if  such  unanswered 
part  be  material,  the  Court  will  refuse  the  writ,(fl)  because  the  prosecutor 
in  such  a  case  has  no  right  to  it ;  so  that  if  it  appear  from  the  whole  of 
the  return  that  the  prosecutor  should  not  have  a  peremptory  mandamus, 
the  Court  will  not  grant  one,(h)  as  where  a  prosecutor's  right  to  restora- 
tion to  an  office  has  ceased  by  lapse  of  time.(c) 

(w)  See  ante,  p.  399,  also  stat.,in  App.  As  to  Irefand,  see  a  similar  enactment, 
Stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  6,  App. 

{v)  See  ante,  tit.  "  Error,"  p.  397 ;  also  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  G1,  App.  As  to  Ireland, 
see  a  similar  enactment,  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  7,  Ap. 

(w)  \nte  p.  287,  288,  297.  R.  v.  Baldwin,  3  P.  &  D.  126.  S.  C.  8  A.  &  E.  949.1 
R.  V.  Griffiths,  5  B.  &  Aid.  731.t     S.  C.  nom.  R.  v.  Bristol,  &c.,  1  D.  &  R.  389.t 

(x)  See  ante,  p.  288,  n.  (g),  [i).  ^    .  e  n 

(y)  See  ante,  p.  9,  10.  R.  v.  Hull,  11  Mod.  391.  R.  v.  Oxon.  (Mayor),  2  Salk". 
428  Buckley  v.  Palmer,  2  Salk.  431.  Veal's  case,  Ray.  431.  R.  v.  Cambridge 
(Mayor)    12  A.  &  E.  714.+     S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  294.     S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  25,  Q.  B. 

(/)  See  ante,  p.  303,  n.  (l).  R.  v.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  Q.  B.  eiG.f  S.  C.  1  G.  & 
D.  728.     S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  231,  Q.  B. 

la)  Clarke  v.  Leicestershire  Canal,  6  Q.  B.  898.f 

(6)  1  D  &  R.  389,t  supra,  n.  [tc).  R.  v.  Featherstonhaugh,  Burr.  530.  R.  v. 
Newcastle,  Bull.  N.  P.  203,  207.  R.  t.  Campion,  1  Sid.  44.  R.  v.  Axbridge,  Cowp. 
523  ■  2  T.  R.  81.  R.  v.  Richardson,  Burr.  530,  534.  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis,  1  Doug. 
157.'  R.  V.  Tidderlej-,  1  Sid.  14.  R.  y.  Rippon  (Mayor),  Salk.  433.  S.  C.  Ld. 
Raym.  5G3.  Bassctt  v.  Chichester,  1  Sid.  286.  R.  v.  Tvvitty,  7  Mod.  83,  n.  (a),  b. 
C.  2  Salk.  434.  S.  C.  Holt,  442.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  5. 
(c)  See  ante,  p.  192,  n.  (c). 


PLEA,     ETC.  439 


A  peremptory  writ  will  also  be  awarded  if  tlie  matter  of  a  return  be 
*for  any  cause  insufficient  in  substance. (fZ)     So,  if  the  return  be  r^cj^QQ-i 
for  any  cause  quashed(r')  or  falsified,  in  an  action  for  a  false  re-  L 
turn  in  the  Court  of  B.  R.,(/)  or  on  a  feigned  issue. ((7) 

The  Court  will  not,  however,  grant  a  peremptory  writ,  though  the  re- 
turn to  the  writ  fail,  or  be  objectionable  either  in  point  of  form  or  sub- 
stance, if  the  facts  stated  on  the  return  justify  the  Court  in  refusing  such 
writ  as  a  matter  of  discretion.  Thus  where  the  return  to  a  writ  to  rein- 
state in  a  municipal  office,  disclosed  that  the  prosecutor  had  been  removed 
for  non-residence,  and  that  he  had  accepted  another  incompatible  office. (7i) 
So  the  Court  will  refuse  to  issue  the  peremptory  writ  in  any  case  in  which 
it  is  clear  the  writ,  if  issued,  cannot  have  any  useful  effect,(?')  or  where  the 
object  of  the  writ  is  illegal,(j)  or  where  the  prosecutor  has  no  title  to 
such  writ.(Z;)  So  the  peremptory  writ  will  be  refused,  if  the  writ  upon 
which  it  is  founded  be  substantially  defective. (/)  Thus  a  peremptory 
mandamus  cannot  be  limited,  but  must  be  in  exact  accordance  with  the 
writ  upon  which  it  is  founded ;  *so  if  such  writ  be  bad,  the  Court  pi^Qo-i 
will  refuse  to  grant  a  peremptory  mandamus  thereupon,  (wi) 

A  peremptory  mandamus  sometimes  goes  by  consent  on  withdrawal  of 
the  return  by  leave  of  the  Court,(ft)  ante,  p.  367. 

[d)  See  ante,  p.  7,  n.  [to],  358,  380  ;  3  Bl.  Com.  Ill  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (M) ; 
Fitzberbert  Nat.  Brev.  330,  E.  R.  v.  Patrick,  2  Keb.  168,  per  Keeling,  C.  J.  R.  v. 
Lirerpool  (Mayor),  Burr.  736.  R.  v.  Doncaster  (Mayor),  Burr.  745.  R.  v.  Ouze 
Bank  (Commrs.),  3  A.  &  E.  544.t  R.  v.  Lyme  Regis,  1  Doug.  85.  R.  v.  Oxon. 
(Mayor),  2  Salk.  429,  435  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  5,  D.  9 ;  Stra.  559.  See  ante, 
tits.  "Error,"  "Return"  (Quashing,  Demurrer). 

(e)  See  ante,  p.  369.  R.  v.  Leicester  (Mayor),  Burr.  2089.  R.  v.  York  (Mayor), 
5  T.  R.  69.  R.  V.  Norwicli  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  1244.  R.  v.  St.  Bartholomew 
Parish,  2  B.  &  Ad.  506.t  R.  v.  Bristol  Dock,  6  B.  &  C.  193.t  S.  C.  9  D.  &  R. 
309.t     R.  r.  Dr.  Harris,  Burr.  1421.     S.  C.  1  W.  Bl.  430. 

(/•)  Wright  y.  Sharpe,  11  Mod.  175.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  288.  S.  C.  Holt,  301.  Buck- 
ley V.  Palmer,  2  Salk.  430  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6.  See  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s. 
2,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  App. ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (M.)  Enfield  v.  Hills,  2  Lev. 
238.     See  post,  tit.  "  Action,  &c.,  for  False  Return." 

{g)  R.  V.  Harris  (Dr.),  Burr.  1423.  S.  C.  1  W.  Bl.  430.  M.  24  Geo.  3,  Gude's 
Cr.  Pr.  201.     See  post,  p.  412. 

(A)  See  ante,  p.  192,  196,  197.  R.  v.  Bristol  (Mayor),  1  D.  &  R.  389.f  S.  C. 
nom.  R.  V.  Griffith^;,  5  B.  &  A.  731,t  and  see  R.  v.  Bank  of  England,  2  B.  &  A. 
620  ;t  BulL  N.  P.  '^07. 

ii)  Sec  ante.  p.  15,  (d),  (w),  h)  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (M.),  citing  R.v.  Griffiths, 
5  B.  &  A.  731.t  R.  y.  Luton  Roads,  1  Q.  B.  860.t  S.  0.  1  G.  &  D.  250.  R  r. 
Manchester  Railway,  3  Q.  B.  533.1     S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  369. 

( /)  See  ante,  p.  16.  R.  v.  St.  Pancras  (Parish),  3  A.  &  E.  541,  542.  S.  C.  5  N. 
&M.  222.f 

Ik)  See  ante,  p.  27,  28,  288,  320.  R.  v.  Tidderley,  1  Sid.  14.  Basset  v.  Barn- 
staple (Mayor),  1  Sid.  286.  R.  y.  Lyme  Regis  (Mayor),  1  Doug.  84.  R.  v.  Raines, 
3  Salk.  233.  Clarke  v.  Leicestersh.  Canal,  6  Q.  B.  898.f  Bassett  v.  Chichester,  1 
Sid.  286;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (M.)  n. 

(l)  See  ante,  p.  305,  n.  ((/),  323,  n.  [t).  R.  v.  St.  Pancras,  3  A.  &  E.  535.f  S.  C. 
5  N.  &  M.  222.t  R.  v.  York  (Mayor),  5  T.  R.  73.  R.  v.  Tidderley,  1  Sid.  14.  Dr. 
Walker's  case,  Cas.  t.  Hard.  217.  '  See  ante,  tits.  "Writs"  (Supersedeas),  (Quash- 
ing), p.  335,  336. 

(m)  3  A.  &  E.  535.t     S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  222,t  supra,  n.  (/). 

(n)  R.  V.  Barker  and  Others,  1  W.  Bl.  352,  n.  (/).  S.  C.  Burr.  1269  ;  Com. 
Dig.  tit,  "Ma:n."  D.  6. 


440  tapping's    mandamus. 

The  o-ranting  of  a  feigned  issue  for  the  trial  of  the  disputed  facts^  sus- 
pends an  application  for  the  peremptory  ■writ.(o) 

The  effect  of  a  mandamus  to  admit  and  swear  in  to  an  office^  confers 
merely  a  legal,  and  not  an  actual  possession,(p)  or  in  other  words,  it  is 
the  consummation  of  a  title,  if  there  he  one.  In  such  cases,  it  neither 
o'ives  a  right,  nor  does  it  conclude  one  ',  it  confers  no  title  per  se,  but 
merely  a  legal  capacity  to  assert  one,  which  cannot  be  done  until  legal 
possession  shall  be  given,  if,  therefore,  the  applicant  have  such  legal  pos- 
session, as  that  is  all  the  Court  can  give  him  by  such  writ  5(5)  so  it  will 
in  such  a  case  refuse  the  writ,  and  leave  him  to  his  ordinary  remedy  ;(r) 
for  by  having  the  legal  possession,  he  is  enabled  either  to  defend  his 
right,  or  to  assert  it  by  bringing  an  action  in  respect  of  powers,  or  things 
incident  to  such  possession. (s) 

In  the  case  of  a  mandamus  to  restore  to  an  office,  the  Court  commands 
the  actual  restoration,  and  thereby  gives  an  actual  possession,  and  this  is 
so,  because  as  the  applicant  has  once  had  an  actual  possession,  it  there- 
fore restores  the  ancient  right. (/)  But  one  who  has  been  removed  from 
being  a  member  of  a  corporation,  and  who  has  been  restored  by  manda- 
mus, cannot  maintain  an  action  for  damages  against  the  members  of  the 
corporation,  who  removed  him  by  an  act  done  in  their  corporate  capacity, 
nor  recover  the  costs  of  the  mandamus. (i<) 

Strangers  to  a  mandamus  are  neither  bound  nor  estopped  by  a(«0 
peremptory  writ  of  mandamus. 

* •]     -^[/ainst  whom  granted. — The   peremptory  writ,   in 

'- '  general,  issues  against  those  who  should  have  executed  the  first 

writ. 

As  to  cases  within  the  scope  of  stat,  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  5,  it  is  enacted, 
that  in  case  the  return  to  any  writ  of  mandamus  shall,  in  pursuance  of 
the  authority  given  by  such  act,  be  expressed  to  be  made  on  hehcdf  oi  any 
person,  the  peremptory  writ  shall,  if  it  be  awarded,  notwithstanding  the 
death  of  the  officer  in  whose  name  it  is  made,  be  directed  to  any  successor 
in  office  or  right  to  such  officer,  (lo) 

(0)  R.  v.  Dr.  Harris,  Burr.  1423.  S.  C.  1  W.  Bl.  430.  See  post,  tit.  "  Feigned 
Issue  "  p  412. 

ip)  R.  v.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  537,  538.  R.  v.  Dr.  Harris,  Burr.  1422.  S.  C. 
1  W  Blac.  430.  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  1267.  R.  v.  Norwich  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym. 
1244.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  436.  R.  v.  Ward,  1  Barn.  381.  See  ante,  tit.  "  Office"  (Ad- 
mission, Swearing  in). 

iq)  R.  T.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  541.  R.  v.  Clarke,  2  East,  TS,  V9,  82,  84 ;  Raym. 
111.  R.  V.  Serle,  8  Mod.  334,  and  cases  there  cited.  R.  t.  Sparrow,  7  Mod.  396. 
Sharp  T.  London  (City),  Gilb.  259.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  (B.) 

(r)  Stra.  541,  supra,  n.  (p).     Patrick's  case,  Raym.  111.     S.  C.  1  Lev.  65. 

{s\  R.  v.  Dublin  (Dean),  8  Mod.  29. 

it)  R.  T.  Dublin  (Dean),  Stra.  538.  R.  v.  Barker,  Burr.  1267.  Bassett  v.  Barn- 
stable (Mayor),  1  Sid.  286.  R.  v.  Exon  (Mayor),  1  Show.  260.  Com.  Dig.  tit. 
"  Man."  (B.)     See  R.  v.  Ipswich  (Mayor),  Ld.  Raym.  1233.     S.  C.  Holt,  443. 

(u)  Harman  v.  Tappenden,  1  East,  555.     S.  C.  3  Esp.  278. 

(f)  R.  V.  Heathcote,  10  Mod.  56.     S.  C.  Fort.  290,  and  cases  there  cited. 

{w)  See  Stat.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9  &  10  Yict.  c.  113,  App.  See  post, 
tit.  "  Abatement,"  p.  410. 


PLEA,     ETC. 


441 


.]     IIoiG  olfaincd— It  has  been  sliev7n,(a:;)  that  at  common  hiw,  if 

the  defendant  returned  a  legally  sufficient  cause  why  he  should  not  exe- 
cute the  duty,  &c.  commanded  by  the  mandatory  clause  of  the  writ, 
although  such  cause  may  have  been  false  in  fact,  yet  the  Court  would  not 
try  the  truth  of  such  return,  upon  affidavits,  but  in  the  first  instance 
assume  it  to  be  true,  and  decline  to  proceed  further  upon  the  mandamus, 
which  course  compelled  the  prosecutor,  if  the  return  were  false,  to  shew 
such  falsity  by  the  extraneous  proceeding  of  an  action  on  the  case  for  a 
false  return,  and  that  if  it  were  found  by  the  jury  to  be  false,  the  prose- 
cutor not  only  recovered  damages  equivalent  to  the  injury  sustained,  but 
also  if  such  action  had  been  brought  in  the  Court  of  13.  11.,  had  awarded 
to  him  a  mandamus,  peremptorili/  commanding  the  defendant  to  do  his 
duty,  &c.  It  is  therefore  clear  that  as  the  proceedings  on  the  mandamus 
were  terminated  by  the  return,  and  as  the  proceeding  by  action  for  a  false 
return,  was  altogether  collateral  to  the  mandamus,  and  a percw^jj^ory  man- 
damus no  part  of  the  judgment  in  such  an  action,  the  prosecutor  could 
only  obtain  such  last-mentioned  writ  on  an  application  to  the  Court,  by 
way  of  motion,  supported  by  affidavits  of  the  falsity  of  the  return,  and 
the  production  of  the  postea,  &c. 

By  Stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,(y)  which,  although  it  introduced,  as  to 
municipal  offices,  a  traverse,  &c.,  to  the  return,  yet  merely  directed  the 
traverse,  &c.,  and  subsequent  proceedings,  to  be  the  same  as  if  the  prose- 
cutor had  brought  his  action  on  the  case  for  a  false  return ;  it  therefore 
followed  that  as  d.  peremptory  manclanms  did  not,  as  we  have  just  seen, 
form  part  of  the  judgment  in  such  an  action;  so  under  this  statute,  the 
prosecutor,  if  he  recovered  a  judgment,  was  obliged  to  obtain  the  peremp- 
tory writ  on  motion  to  the  Court,  supported  by  affidavits  of  the  facts  of 
his  case,  whereupon  the  act  directs  that  such  peremptory  writ  shall  be 
granted  to  him  without  delay. 

By  Stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  o,(i/!/)  the  enactments  of  the  9  Ann.  c.  20, 
*relating  to  returns  to  the  writs  of  mandamus  therein  mentioned,  r*4Q5-| 
and  the  proceedings  thereupon  were  extended  to  all  other  writs  of 
mandamus ;  therefore  for  all  cases  within  this  clause  of  the  statute,  the 
prosecutor  was  and  is  obliged,  after  he  has  obtained  judgment,  to  move 
the  Court,  as  before  stated,  for  his  peremptort/  writ. 

Also  section  4  of  the  same  statute,  which  provides  for  the  protection  of 
certain  officers  to  whom  writs  of  mandamus  in  certain  cases  are  directed, 
against  the  damages  or  costs  thereof,  enacts  :  that  if  any  judgment  shall 
be  given  for  or  against  the  party  suing  such  writ,  such  judgment  shall  be 
given  against  or  for  the  person  or  persons  on  whose  behalf  the  return  shall 
be  expressed  to  be  made,  and  who  shall  have  the  like  remedy  for  the  re- 
covery of  costs,  and  enforcing  the  judgment,  as  the  person  to  whom  the 

[x]  Ante,  p.  6,  n.  (r),  and  see  post,  tit.  "Action,  &c.,  for  false  return." 
(?/)  See  Stat.  App.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  App. 

■     (yy)  See  stat.  App.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113.     See  ante,  p. 

6,  n.  (m),  383,  n.  (/),  393,  n.  (c). 


442  tapping's    mandamus. 

writ  sliall  have  been  directed,  might  or  otherwise  \yould  have  had.  So 
that  all  successful  prosecutors  within  this  section  are  compelled  to  adopt 
the  common  law  means  of  obtaining  the  peremptory  writ,  namely,  by  mo- 
tion, supported  by  affidavits. 

However,  by  stat.  6  &  7  Yict.  c.  G7,  s.  l,(.i)  which  ordains,  that  the 
prosecutor,  in  order  to  object  to  the  validity  of  a  return  to  a  mandamus, 
must  demur  thereto,  provides,  that  if  the  Court  shall  adjudge  "  that  the 
return  is  not  valid  in  law,  then  and  in  every  such  case  they  shall  also,  by 
their  said  Jtidgmenf,  award  that  a  peremptory/  mandamus  shall  issue  in 
that  behalf,  and  thereupon  such  peremptory  writ  of  mandamus  may  be 
sued  out  and  issued  accordingly  at  any  time  after  four  days  from  the 
signing  of  the  said  judgment."  Therefore  a  prosecutor,  who  success- 
fully demurs  to  a  retm-n,  and  obtains  a  judgment  quashing  it,  is  saved 
the  common  law  inconvenience  of  making  an  application  to  the  Court 
for  the  peremptory  writ,  because  the  Court  directs  it,  by  its  judgment,  to 
issue. 

Also  by  sect.  2,  of  the  same  statute,(a)  which  provides  a  wi"it  of  error 
upon  judgments  upon  either  fact  or  law,  in  cases  of  mandamus,  also  directs, 
that  if  the  Court  of  Error,  by  i\i(AY  judymcnt,  shall  award  that  a  peremp- 
tory  writ  shall  issue,  the  same  shall  and  may  accordingly  be  issued  by  the 
j>roper  officer,  in  the  office  from  which  such  writs  issue,  as  the  case  may 
be,  upon  production  to  him  of  an  office  copy  of  the  said  judgment  of  the 
Court  of  Error,  which  shall  be  his  authority  and  warrant  for  so  doing. 
Thus,  in  cases  of  judgment  for  the  prosecutor,  on  a  writ  of  error,  he  is 
relieved  from  the  common  law  inconvenience  of  making  a  separate  appli- 
cation for  such  writ. 

r*infii  ^^^  ^^  above  cases  of  demurrer  to  the  return,  and  a  writ  of 
error,  the  enactments  above  set  forth,  shew  how  the  peremptory 
writ  is  obtained  and  issued,  it  remains  therefore  to  state  more  specifically 
than  has  been  done,  how  such  writ  is  obtained,  when  the  proceedings  are 
by  motion  at  common  law. 

.]     Motion  ichere  and  when  made. — The  writ  must  be  moved  for 

in  the  Court  of  B.  K.  at  '\Yestminster.(i) 

After  judgment  for  the  prosecutor,  a  rule  nisi  for  a  peremptory  manda- 
mus is  granted  on  motion,  supported  by  an  affidavit  of  the  facts,  and  read- 
ing the  mandamus,  return,  traverse,  entry  of  postea,  &c.(c)  Four  days 
must  have  elapsed  after  the  return  of  the  postea,  because  the  defendant 
has  so  long  to  move  in  arrest  of  judgment,  &.c.{d) 

(z)  See  stat.  App.,  and  ante,  tit.  "  Return"  (Demurrer),  p.  375 — 381.  As  to  Ire- 
land, see  a  similar  enactment  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  6,  App. 

(a)  See  stat.  App.,  and  also  ante,  tit.  "  Error,"  p.  397 — 399.  As  to  Ireland,  see 
a  similar  enactment  stat.  9  &  10  Yict.  c.  113,  s.  6,  Ajip. 

(b)  Ante,  p.  5,  n.  (/"),  296,  n.  (t). 

(c)  R.  V.  Baldxrin,  8  A.  &  E.  949.f  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  124  ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man." 
(M.),  n.;  Sliin.  669.  pi.  7. 

((/)  Buckley  v.  Palmer.  Holt,  440.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  430,  431.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man." 
(M.),  Enfield V.  Hills,  2  Lev.  238. 


^  PLEA,     ETC.  448 

The  peremptory  writ  must  not  be  moved  for,  nor  will  tlie  Court  award 
it,  until  the  proceedings  on  the  first  mandamus  are  complete,' and  there  is 
judgment  upon  the  whole  record,  for  it  cannot  be  awarded  on  part  of  a 
record ;  thus  where  a  mandamus  issued,  which  commanded  payment  of 
two  distinct  sums,  the  return  to  which  writ  the  prosecutor  traversed,  and 
the  issues  found  for  him  as  to  one  sum,  and  substantially  in  his  favour  as 
to  the  other,  but  as  a  rule  nisi  had  been  obtained  to  enter  a  verdict  as  to 
the  latter,,  the  Court  refused  to  award  a  peremptory  mandamus  to  enforce 
payment  of  the  first  sum,  pending  the  rule  as  to  the  second. (f)  So  if  the 
peremptory  writ  should  be  obtained  before  judgment  signed,  the  Court,  on 
motion,  will  set  it  aside,  with  costs.  (/)  The  prosecutor  need  not,  how- 
ever, delay  the  motion  for  the  peremptory  writ,  until  the  judgment  shall 
be  entered  up  formally. (5^) 

The  Court  will  grant  a  peremptory  mandamus,  after  judgment,  for  the 
plaintifi",  in  an  action  for  a  false  return,  notwithstanding  a  bill  of  exceptions 
was  tendered  at  the  trial ;  if,  however,  a  rule  for  a  new  trial  has  been  ob- 
tained, it  is  otherwise ;  for  such  a  rule  stops  the  issuing  of  the  peremptory 
writ.  (A)  So  pending  a  writ  of  error  in  an  action  for  a  false  return,  the 
Court  will  not  grant  a  peremptory  writ.(/)  But  if  judgment  *for  r^t^^i^q-i 
the  defendant  in  an  action  for  a  false  return,  be  reversed  in  the 
Exchequer  Chamber,  or  in  the  House  of  Lords,  a  peremptory  mandamus 
will  be  awarded  of  course,  without  any  express  judgment. (/)  The  mere 
production  of  the  postea  falsifying  the  return,  has  been  held  sufficient  to 
support  a  motion  for  the  peremptory  writ.(Z,')  Such  action  for  a  false  re- 
turn must,  however,  have  been  brought  in  the  Court  of  B.  E.,  because  as 
the  peremptory  writ  recites  the  fact  prout  constat  nobis  per  recordum,  that 
cannot  be  said  of  the  records  of  an  action  in  another  Court,  of  which  the 
Court  of  B.  K.  cannot  take  notice. (/) 

.]     Rule  Nisi  and  Absolute. — The  rule  nisi  is  argued  and  made 

absolute,  or  disposed  of  as  an  ordinary  rule. (771) 

The  Court  will  sometimes  grant  a  peremptory  writ,  but  restrain  the 
issuing  thereof  until  a  particular  day,  in  order  that  the  Court  may  in  the 
mean  time  consider  the  case  more  fully,  (w) 

(c)  Enfield  v.  Hills,  2  Lev.  238.  R.  v.  Baldwin,  8  A.  &  E.  94'7.t  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D. 
124  S  C.  1  W.  W.  &  H.  681.  See  2  Salk.  428,  438.  Foot  v.  Prowse,  Stra.  697. 
R.  V.  Lutton  Roads,  10  L.  J.,  N.  S.  263,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  248.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B. 
860.f     See  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  1,  App. 

(/)  Supra,  n.  (e).     Neale  v.  Bowles,  1  H.  &  W.  584. 

(g)  Foote  v.  Prowse,  Stra.  C97.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6. 

{h)  Wright  v.  Sharpe,  11  Mod/'l^S.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  288.  S.  C.  Holt,  301.  Buck- 
ley v.  Palmer,  2  Salk.  430,  and  cases  there  cited.  Enfield  v.  Hills,  2  Lev.  238.  S. 
C.  Sir  T.  Jon.  116.  ,^      „ 

(0  Ruding  T.  Newel,  Stra.  983.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man. 
(M.) 

{/)  Foote  V.  Prowse,  Str.  697.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6. 

(/f)  Fall  V.  Reg.,  2  G.  &  D.  809.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  656.1  Foot  v.  Prowse,  Stra.  69  i, 
698  ;  5  Bac.  Abr.  287,  «  Man."  (M.)     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (M.) 

[l]  Anon.,  2  Salk.  428.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  125,  nom.  Green  y.  Pope.  S.  C  Comb. 
400.     S.  C.  Skin.  670.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  6. 

(m)  See  ante,  p.  295—306. 

(w)  R.  v.  Tappenden,  3  East,  191.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (M.) 


444  tapping's    mandamus. 

.]      When  Wyit  peremplory  in  first  Instance. — A  peremptory  writ 


of  mandamus  is  seldom  awarded  in  tlie  first  instance, (o)  and  never  as 
against  those,  not  parties  to  the  proceedings,  (p)  Thus,  the  Court  has 
refused  a  peremptory  writ  to  the  master  of  college  to  remove  A.  B.  &c., 
because  they  were  not  made  parties  to  the  first  writ.((;^) 

In  cases  of  great  urgency  however,  the  Court  will  grant  a  peremptory 
writ  in  the  first  instance  without  waiting  for  a  return.  Thus,  where  a 
gaoler  refused  to  deliver  up  the  body  of  a  person,  who  had  died  while  a 
prisoner  in  execution  in  his  custody,  to  the  executors  of  the  deceased,  the 
Court  issued  a  mandamus  peremptory  in  the  first  instance.  If  in  such  a 
case  the  defendant  have  any  answer  to  the  writ  it  may  be  given,  not  by 
way  of  return,  but  in  shewing  cause  why  an  attachment  should  not 
issue. (r)  Notice  of  the  motion  for  the  writ  should  be  given  to  those 
against  whom  it  is  sought. (.s)  So  as  to  elections  to  municipal  ofl&ces  un- 
der Stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  s.  5.(^) 

.]     Form  of  Writ. — In  form  the  peremptory  writ  is  the  same  as 

^  *the  writ  upon  which  it  is  founded, («)  except  that  it  not  only  has 

L  -'  not  the  alternative  sentence,  namely,  vel  causam  nobis  signifiees, 
or  si  ita  est,  &c.,  or  si  vobis  constare  poterit,  or  sicut  informamur,  &c., 
but  has  the  word  ^- perem])torilij"  inserted  in  the  mandatory  clause,(w)  it 
therefore  peremptorily  commands  the  doing  of  the  act,  &e.  As  to  whom 
the  peremptory  writ  is  to  be  directed  in  cases  within  the  stat.  1  Wm.  4, 
c.  21,  s.  5;  see  ante  p.  313. (u') 

.]     How  issued.— T]\Q  peremptory  writ  is  prepared  and  engrossed, 

and  signed  and  sealed  at  the  Crown  Office,  and  served  the  same  as  the 
former  writ,(a;)  also  if  there  have  been  a  mistake  in  the  service  of  the 
peremptory  writ,  the  Court  will  allow  a  new  one  to  issue. (y) 

A  side  bar  rule  may  be  had  to  return  it  as  before  mentioned,(3)  and 
upon  an  affidavit  of  personal  service  of  the  writ,  the  Court  will  grant  an 
attachment  for  contempt,  against  the  party  or  parties  who  have  been 
served  with  the  writ  or  copies  thereof,  for  refusing  to  pay  obedience  to 
such  peremptory  writ,  (a) 

.]     Return. — The   Court  will  not  hear  a  return  to  a  peremptory 

(o)  R.  V.  Eye  (Mayor),  9  A.  &  E.  676.t  S.  C.  2  P.  &  D.  348.  S.  C.  8  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
142,  Q.  B. 

ip)  R.  T.  Baldwin,  8  A.  &  E.  949.f     S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  124. 

[q]  R.  V.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Skin.  549. 

(r)  R.  T.  Fox,  2  Q.  B.  246.f  S.  0.  1  G.  &  D.  5G6.  nom.  In  re  Wakefield  (BailifiF). 
S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  41,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  nom.  In  re  Jewison,  5  Jur.  989.  See  R.  v. 
Eye  (Mayor),  9  A.  &  E.  GTG.f  See  also  In  re  Long,  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  23  Q.  B.  S.  C. 
14L.  J.,'N.  S.  144,  Q.  B. 

(s)  Anou.,  1  Barn.  227.  {t)  See  stat.  App. 

(m)  Ante,  p.  308 — 331.  As  to  direction,  see  R.  t.  Ipswich  (Bailiffs),  2  Salk.  435. 
S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  1233. 

(v)  See  ante,  p.  326.     R.  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  Skin.  359.     S.  C.  Holt,  436. 

\w)  See  stat.  App.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  App. 

\x)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  186.     See  ante,  p.  330,  and  see  ante,  p.  405,  n.  {z),  406. 

{^J)  Lyme  Regis  T.  20  Geo.  3,  Gude's,  Cr.  Pr.  191. 

(z)  Ante,  p.  344  ;  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  186. 

(a)  R.  v.  Salop  (Churchwardens),  Bull.  N.  P.  tit.  "  Man."  p.  198  ;  Gude's  Cr.  Pr, 
186.     See  post,  tit.  "  Attachment." 


PLEA,     ETC.  445 

mandamus,  though  it  state  an  attempt  made  to  comply  with  the  writ,  and 
the  causes  by  which  it  was  frustrated,  a  retu.rn  not  being  in  general  re- 
ceivable to  such  a  writ.(?>)  If,  however,  the  circumstances  of  the  case  re- 
quire it,  the  Court  will  quash  the  peremptory  writ,  and  allow  a  defendant 
to  make  a  return  to  the  first  writ.(e) 

There  should,  however,  be  a  leturn  in  the  nature  of  a  certificate,  alleg- 
ing that  the  writ  has  been  complied  with,  and  such  a  proceeding  is  a  ne- 
cessary one,  and  if  not  filed  the  Court  will  grant  an  attachment,  (f/) 

].  Setting  it  aside,  &c. — If  the  peremptory  writ  have  prema- 
turely or  improperly  issued  a  rule  to  set  it  aside,  or  quash  it  with  costs 
may  be  obtained  on  motion. (e)  So,  if  it  have  been  unnecessarily  issued. (/) 
*So,  if  the  peremptory  writ  be  upon  the  face  of  it  bad  in  substance  ,., 
such  insufficiency  will  form  a  valid  answer  to  a  rule  for  an  attach- '-  -^ 
ment  against  those  who  have  refused  obedience  to  it.(^) 

The  rule  to  quash  or  set  aside  the  writ  is  put  into  the  Crown  paper  on 
a  rule  for  a  concilium,  which  rule  should  specify  the  day  on  which  the 
case  will  be  put  into  the  paper  for  argument,  and  should  be  di-awn  up  and 
served  six  days  at  least  before  such  day  if  the  venue  be  within  forty  miles 
of  London,  and  eight  days  in  all  other  cases. (A) 

.]     Amendment  of  Writ. — As  to  amendment  generally,  see  title 

Wi'it  (^Amendment),  ante,  pp.  334,  335. 

The  Court,  as  we  have  seen,  has  power  to  and  will  for  the  purposes  of 
justice  mould  the  rule  for  a  mandamus,(«')  but  cannot  remould  the  writ 
after  it  has  issued,  and  award  a  peremptory  mandamus  in  a  more  limited 
or  other  form  than  the  original  mandamus,  the  peremptory  writ  must  go 
in  the  terms  of  the  original  writ  or  not  at  all. (J) 

(b)  Holt,  446.  R.  V.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  "728.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  GlG.f  S.  C. 
9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  231,  Q.  B. 

(c)  R.  V.  Owen,  Skin.  669,  cited  in  5  Bac.  Abr.  281,  Hh  edit.,  tit.  "Man."  (A.) 
R.  V.  Luton  Roads,  1  Q.  B.  860.f     S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  250.     See  infra,  n.  [v). 

(d)  See  ante,  p.  346,  and  supra,  n.  (a);  Gude's  Or.  Pr.  186.  R.  v.  Milverton 
(Manor),  3  A.  &  E.  286,t  n.  [d);  Bull.  N.  P.  201. 

(e)  Sec  ante,  p.  335,  336.  R.  v.  Baldwin,  8  A.  &  E.  947.f  S.  C.  3  P.  &  D.  124. 
S.  C.  1  W.  W.  &  H.  681.     In  re  Long,  14  L.  J.,  N.  S.  146,  Q.  B.  See  supra,  n.  (e) 

(./■)  Hogg  v.  King's  Lynn  (Mayor),  T.  24  Geo.  3  ;  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  192.  See  ante, 
p.  335,  336. 

[g)  R.  v.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  728.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  616-1  S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
231,  Q.  B.     See  post,  tit.  "Attachment,"  and  ante,  p.  335—339. 

[h]  Cr.  Off.  Rill.,  r.  22,  App.     See  ante,  p.  335,  336. 

U.)  See  ante,  p.  305,  n.  [g],  313,  n.  {w),  323,  n.  [t). 

\j)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  5  N.  &  M.  219.t  S.  C.  3  A.  &  E.  535.t  See  R.  v.  Leices- 
ter (.L),  7  D.  &  R.  393.t  S.  C.  4  B.  &  0.  891.t  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  5  Q.  B.  l.f 
S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  170.     S.  C.  1  D.  &  M.  590.     S.  0.  12  L.  J.,  N.  S.  148,  M.  C. 


446 


TAPPINGS     MANDAMUS. 


[*410] 


*CHAPTER  THE  EIGHTH. 


OF  VARIOUS  PROCEEDINGS  OF   OCCASIONAL   OCCURRENCE,   AND    ALSO    OP 
THE  SUBJECTS  OF  COSTS  AND  ATTACHMENT. 

Having  treated  of  tlie  ordinary  proceedings  of  a  -writ  of  mandamus, 
from  the  commencement  to  the  award  of  the  peremptory  writ,  we  now 
proceed  to  notice  a  few  uicidcnts  of  occasional  occurrence,  with  Avhich  a 
mandamus  case  is  sometimes  varied,  and  also  of  the  subjects  of  costs  and 
attachment. 


410 

Costs — Against  whom 

granted 

411 

Justices    - 

- 

-  418 

411 

Inhabitants,  &c. 

- 

-  418 

411 

Officers,  &c. 

- 

-  419 

412 

How  obtained 

- 

-  419 

412 

Motion  for 

- 

-  419 

412 

Affidavits 

- 

-  420 

413 

Rule  nisi 

- 

-  421 

413 

Security  for  costs 

- 

-  421 

413 

Forma  Pauperis 

- 

-  421 

413 

Taxation 

- 

-  421 

414 

Attachment. 

415 

Nature  of 

- 

-  421 

415 

''tVhen  granted 

- 

-  422 

How  obtained 

- 

-  423 

415 

Motion     - 

- 

-  423 

413 

Rule  nisi 

- 

-  423 

418 

Shewing  cause 

- 

-  423 

418 

Writ,  form  of 

- 

-  424 

Abatement  of  Writ 
Interpleader 
Special  Case 

Costs 
Feigned  Issue 
Bill  of  Exceptions 
Arbitration 
Affidavits 

When  required 

How  entitled 

Body  of  Affidavit 

Jurat 

Filing 

Amendment  of 
Costs. 

"When  granted 

Against  whom  granted 
Bishop     - 
Corporation  Municipal 

Abatement  of  Writ.]  By  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  1,  it  is  enacted,  that 
the  prosecutor  may  plead  to  or  traverse  all  or  any  of  the  material  facts 
contained  within  the  return,  to  which  the  defendant  shall  reply,  take  issue 
or  demur,  and  such  further  proceedings,  and  in  such  manner  be  had 
therein  for  the  determination  thereof  as  might  have  been  had  if  the  pro- 
secutor had  brought  his  action  on  the  case  for  a  false  return  ;(/.•)  therefore, 
the  rules  of  law  and  practice  as  to  abatement  by  death,  &c.,  *in 
[''''±11]  g^ggg  Qf  mandamus  are  the  same  as  in  personal  actions.(/)  Also 
by  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  5,(m)  it  is  enacted  that  in  case  the  return  to 
any  writ  within  the  purview  of  that  act,  be  expressed  to  be  made  on  behalf 
of  any  person  other  than  him  to  whom  the  writ  is  directed,  such  writ  or 
the  proceedings  had  thereupon,  shall  neither  abate  nor  be  discontinued 
by  the  death  or  resignation  of,  or  removal  from  office  of  the  person  making 
such  return,  but  the  same  shall  and  may  be  continued  and  carried  on  in 
the  name  of  such  person,  and  if  a  peremptory  writ  shall  be  awarded  the 
same  shall  and  may  be  directed  to  any  successor  in  office  or  right  to  such 
person. 

(k)  See  stat.  App.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  App. 

(l)  See  Chit.  Prac.  1406—1409,  8th  edit. 

(ot)  See  stat.  App.     As  to  Ireland,  sec  stat.  9  &  10  Yict.  c.  133,  App. 


VARIOUS     PROCEEDINGS.  447 

Interpleader.]  The  law  ami  practice  of  interpleader  in  personal 
actions,  are  by  stats.  1  AVm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4,  and  1  &  2  Wra.  4,  c.  58,  s. 
8,(n)  made  applicable  to  cases  of  mandamus. 

Special  Case.]  The  Court  will,  on  shewing  cause  upon  the  rule  nisi 
for  the  writ,  by  consent  order  such  rule  to  be  enlarged,  and  direct  that  in 
the  meantime,  the  facts  upon  which  it  would  have  been  argued  shall  be 
stated  in  a  special  case  for  their  opinion,  the  decision  upon  which  to  decide 
whether  the  rule  nisi  shall  be  made  absolute,  or  not.(o)  So  after  a  re- 
turn, the  Court  will,  on  motion  to  quash  the  writ  for  insufficiency,  by  con- 
sent direct  the  facts  to  be  stated  in  a  special  case,  the  result  of  the  argu- 
ment upon  which  to  determine  whether  the  peremptory  Avrit  shall  be 
granted,  or  not.(^j)  So  a  verdict  may  be  found  upon  a  feigned  issue,  or 
upon  a  traverse,  &c.,(r/)  subject  to  the  opinion  of  the  Court  upon  a  special 
case.(r) 

For  the  preparation  and  conduct  of  a  special  case,  see  Chit.  Pract.  807, 
8th  edit. 

.]      Costs. — The  party  in  whose  favour  the  Court  gives  judgment 

on  a  special  case,  is  entitled,  imder  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  to  such  costs 
as  he  would  have  obtained  in  an  action  for  a  false  return.(s) 

*Feigned  Issue.]  The  Court  will,  upon  shewing  cause  upon  r*4;|^2'l 
the  rule  for  the  writ,  by  consent  order  the  rule  nisi  to  be  enlarged, 
and  direct  (as  the  cheapest  and  best  course)  that,  in  the  meantime,  the 
matters  in  dispute  shall  be  tried  by  feigned  issue,  the  verdict  upon  which 
to  decide  the  fate  of  the  rule.(i')  So  the  Court  will  direct  it  where  facts 
are  disputed  by  a  return. (w)  If  consent  be  withheld  by  either  party,  the 
Court  will  determine  the  rule  against  the  party  so  withholding  it.(i;)  A 
verdict  may  be  found  on  a  feigned  issue,  subject  to  a  special  case.(«') 

(w)  See  Stat.  App.  See  Chit.  Prac.  1211,  8th  edit.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9  & 
10  Vict.  c.  113.  App. 

(o)  R.  V.  Nene  Outfall  (Commrs.),  9  B.  &  C.  StG.f  R.  v.  Drake,  6  M.  &  S.  116. 
R.  V.  Baker,  7  A.  &  E.  502.f  S.  C.  2  K  &  P.  3T5.  R.  t.  House  of  Correction 
(Governor),  2  N.  &  M.  ISS.f 

{p)  R.  V.  London  Dock,  5  A.  &  E.  IGS.f  S.  C.  G  N.  &  M.  300,f  where  see  form 
of  case.     R.  v.  Stafford  (Marquis),  V  East,  521.     See  infra,  n.  [u). 

(q)  R.  V.  Kelt),  12  A.  k  E.  559.}  S.  C.  4  P.  &  D.  185.  R.  v.  St.  Andrew's  Parish, 
13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  341,  Q.B. 

(r)  Snook  v.  Mattock,  5  A.  &  E.  239,t  post,  p.  412,  n.  («•)•  R-  v.  London  (Mayor), 
9  B.  &  C.  S.f  S.  C.  4  M.  &  R.  54,  55.  See  ante,  tit.  "  Trial,"  and  stat.  3  &  4  Wm. 
4,  c.  42,  s.  25. 

(s)  R.  V.  Kelb,  1  Q.  B.  GOi.f  S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  127.  S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  3G2,  Q. 
B.     See  generally  as  to  costs,  tit.  "  Costs,"  post,  415. 

(t)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  12  East,  117.  R.  v.  Paddington  Vestrj^,  9  B.  &  C. 
459.f  R.  V.  Winchester  (Commissary),  7  East,  578.  R.  t.  Blooer,  Burr.  1044.  R. 
V.  Barker,  Burr.  1269.  R.  v.  Cheshunt  Roads,  5  B.  &  Ad.  439,t  n.  (a).  And  see  8 
A.  &E.  5G2.t  R.  V.  London  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  333,  334.  R.  t.  Guy,  6  Mod.  89.  San- 
dys v.  Sandys,  1  Q.  B.  316.t 

The  practice  as  to  feigned  issues  in  cases  of  mandamus  is  the  same  as  in  ordi- 
nary cases.     See  Chit.  Prac.  807—813,  8th  edit. 

(m)  R.  t.  Thames  Commissioners,  5  A.  &  E.  815.f 

(v)  il.  V.  Bedford  Level,  6  East,  369,  370.     S.  C.  2  Smith,  535. 

{w}  Snook  V.  Jlattock,  5  A.  &  E.  239.t  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  12  East,  117. 
See  ante,  p.  411,  n.  [r). 


448  tapping's    mandamus. 

If  a  maiiclamus  be  not  retuvucd,  because  the  mayor  and  otliers  to  whom 
it  is  directed  are  of  different  opinions,  the  Court,  instead  of  granting  an 
attachment,  will  by  consent  direct  the  right  to  be  tried  by  a  feigned 
issue. (x)  But  before  the  Court  will  allow  a  feigned  issue,  it  will  see  that 
there  is  some  good  ground  for  it;  it  will  not  be  granted  merely  for  ask- 
ing,(3/)  because  it  usually  directs  the  peremptory  mandamus  to  stay,  until 
after  the  determination  of  the  feigned  issue.(2) 

Bill  op  Exceptions.]  By  virtue  of  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  extended 
by  Stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  the  law  of  "  Bill  of  Excrptions,"  as  it  obtains 
in  personal  actions,  is  applicable  to  cases  of  mandamus  ;(a)  but  it  has 
been  held,  that  the  mere  tender  of  a  bill  of  exceptions  at  the  trial,  is  no 
cause  for  staying  the  granting  of  the  peremptory  writ  after  judgment  for 
a  false  return. (/^) 

Arbitration.]  Sometimes  the  matters  of  a  rule  for  a  mandamus  are 
referred  to  arbitration,  and  when  such  is  the  case,  the  proceedings  are  the 
same  as  in  personal  actions,  (c) 

^Affidavits.]  It  is  not  within  the  scope  of  this  Work  to  treat 
""J  of  affidavits  in  general,('/)  but  merely  to  state  such  variations  from 
their  form  in  personal  actions,  as  are  necessary  to  render  them  applicable 
to  the  cases  of  mandamus. 

.]      When  required. — lu  all  cases  where  the  prosecutor  is   entitled 

to  the  writ  ex  debito  justiti^e,  as  a  mandamus  to  restore  to  an  office,  the 
Court  never  requires  affidavits  of  the  facts,  although  it  is  usual  to  have 
the  facts  deposed  to ;  but  where  the  application  is  to  the  discretion  of 
the  Court,  it  expects  and  requires  an  affidavit. fe). 

.]     Eoiv  entitled. — The  affidavits  for  the  application  for  the  writ 

may  be  entitled,  "  In  the  Queen's  Bench,"  but  should  not  have  any  other 
heading  as  of  the  cause,  or  otherwise ;  for  at  the  time  the  rule  is  moved 
for,  there  cannot  be  a  cause  in  the  Court :  (/)  after  there  is  cause  in  Court, 
the  affidavits  must  of  course  state  it,  and  correctly.  Thus,  where  a  writ 
applied  for  by  the  Earl  of  Radnor,  was  directed  to  the  trustees  of  a  turn- 

(x)  Ante,  p.  342,  n.  [q).  R.  v.  Rje  (Jurates),  Burr.  798.  S.  C.  2  Ld.  Ken.  435. 
Com.  Dig-,  tit.  'S\Ian."  D.  6. 

(y)  R.  Y.  London  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  334. 

(z)  See  tit.  "  Peremi)lory  Writ."  R.  v.  Dr.  Harris,  1  W.  Blac.  431.  S.  C.  Burr. 
1420,  1423,  where  see  form  of  rule.  See  also  R.  v.  Dr.  Hay,  1  W.  Blac.  640.  S.  C. 
Burr.  2295.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Churchwardens,"  (A.)     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  (D.) 

(a)  See  Stat.  App.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  App. 

{b)  R.  v.  Sharpe,  11  Mod.  175. 

(c)  See  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  extended  by  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  App.  As  to  Ireland, 
see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  113,  App.  In  re  Palmer,  9  A.  &  E. 
4C3.t     S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  492.     See  Chit.  Prac.  14G1,  8th  edit. 

[d)  They  will  be  found  treated  at  large.  Chit.  Prac.  1445,  8th  edit. 

(c)  Sec  ante,  p.  287,  288,  292,  293.  R.  v.  Cory,  Holt,  439.  See  the  several  titles 
throughout  the  alphabetical  series. 

(/)  R.  V.  Warwicksh.  (J.),  5  D.  382.  Ex  parte  Nohro,  1  B.  &  C.  2G7.t  R.  v. 
Hare,  13  East,  188.     Kenuet  v.  Avon  Canal,  7  T.  R.  451. 


VARIOUS     PROCEEDINGS.  449 

pike  road,  it  was  held,  that  an  affidavit  entitled  "  The  trustees  of  the  H. 
roads,  on  the  prosecution  of  the  Earl  of  Radnor,"  was  improperly  entitled, 
and  could  not  be  read. (y) 

The  rule  as  to  entitling  affidavits  is  this,  that  although  affidavits  in  sup- 
port of  an  application  for  the  rule  need  not  be  entitled  where  there  is  no 
cause  in  Court,  yet  that  affidavits  in  answer  must  be  entitled  in  the  same 
way  as  the  rule  is,  which  they  are  produced  to  oppose. (/;) 

.]     Bod}j  of  Affidavit. — The  matter  of  every  affidavit  must  be  in 

accordance  with  the  facts  of  each  case,  and  such  facts  should  be  stated 
with  certainty  and  precision,  and  be  sufficient  in  substance  to  support  the 
motion.  (/) 

As  to  the  substance  or  body  of  the  affidavit,  it  is  sufficient  to  state 
generally  the  title  of  the  applicant,(y)  his  right,  or  the  wrong  for  which 
*he  seeks  redress,  and  shew  that  he  has  complied  with  all  the  forms  r^ji 4-1 
necessary  to  constitute  such  right.(7i-)  It  must  also  shew  the  juris- 
diction of  the  Court,  and  the  legal  obligation  of  the  party  against  whom 
the  motion  is  made,  to  do  the  act,  or  discharge  the  duty,(?)  and  in  what 
character  it  is  required  of  him,(m)  the  demand  and  refusal,  where  neces- 
sary,(??)  and  the  absence  of  any  specific  legal  remedy.  (0) 

The  Court  of  B.  R.  will  presume  omnia  rite  acta,  in  pursuance  of  a 
mandamus  granted,  in  the  absence  of  affidavits  shewing  the  irregularity. 
So  that,  in  such  a  case,  if  the  proceedings  be  regular,  there  is  no  need  of 
affidavits  shewing  such  regularity,  (p) 

The  Court  will  make  the  rule  for  the  writ  absolute,  although  the  affida- 
vits on  which  the  rule  nisi  is  obtained,  contain  misrepresentation,  scandal, 
and  also  suppress  certain  facts,  if  sufficient  remain  unanswered  to  shew  a 
necessity  for  the  writ.(5') 

{g)  R.  V.  Ilarnham  Roads,  5  Jur.  408.  R.  v.  Great  "Western  Railway,  I  D.  &  M. 
471.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  597.t  S.  C.  1  D.  &  L.  874.  And  see  tit.  "  Costs"  (Affidavits), 
post,  p.  415. 

(h)  In  re  Grantham,  4  D.  &  L.  427. 

{i)  Bull.  N.  P.  196.  R.  T.  Pickles,  3  Q.  B.  599.f  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  5  B.  & 
Ad.  233,  237.1  R.  v.  Sargent,  5  T.  R.  466.  R.  v.  Cumberland  (J.),  4  A.  &  E. 
696,t  n.  {a).  R.  v.  Bateman,  4  B.  &  Ad.  554-1  R.  v.  Jotham,  3  T.  R.  577.  See 
the  general  form  of  an  affidavit,  R.  v.  Merchant  Taylors,  2  B.  &  Ad.  115. f 

{j)  See  ante,  p.  320,  322.  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  10  A.  &  E.  531.f  S. 
C.  4  P.  &  D.  48.  S.  C.  1  Rail.  Cas.  509.  R.  v.  Jotham,  3  T.  R.  577,  and  see  Burr. 
1265.  R.  V.  Frost,  8  A.  &  E.  822.1  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  75.  S.  C.  1  W.  W.  &  H.  664. 
R.  V.  Warwicksh.  (J.),  6  Q.  B.  751.1 

(k)  See  ante,  p.  294;  3  T.  R.  577,  supra,  p.  294,  n.  {a).  R.  v.  Bateman,  4  B.  &Ad. 
754.t     R.  V.  Clear,  4  B.  &  C.    899.t     S.  C.  7  D.  &  R.  393.1 

[l)  See  ante,  p.  322.  Ex  parte  Duffield,  3  A.  &  E.  6l7.t  R.  v.  Oxford  (Ep.),  7 
East,  345  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  tit.  "  Man." 

[m)  See  ante,  p.  292,  n.  (m).  R.  v.  West  Looe  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  C.  683.f  S.  C. 
5  D.  &  R.  590.t     S.  C.  2  D.  &  R.  181.t 

(n)  R.  V.  Borough  of  St.  Ives,  Bull.  N.  P.  195.  R.  v.  Bristol  Railway,  7  Jur.  233. 
See  demand  and  refusal,  p.  282.  See  each  title  as  to  any  particular  requisites  in 
the  affidavits. 

(0)  See  ante,  p.  294,  n.  (i),  323. 

{p)  R.  V.  Nottingham  Old  Waterworks,  G  A.  &  E.  370,  371.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P. 
480.t     S.  C.  1  W.  W.  &  D.  166. 

{q)  See  ante,  p.  303,  n.  {I).     R.  v.  Payn,  I  N.  &  P.  524.t     S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  SDS.f 

JUNE;  1852.— 29 


450  tapping's    mandamus. 

Supplemental  affidavits  may  be  used,  and  frequently  arc ;  (/•)  but  an 
omission  in  the  prosecutor's  affidavits,  may  be  supplied  by  a  reference  to 
those  of  the  defendant. (s) 

.]     Jurat. — The  form  of  the  jurat  is  the  same  as  that  portion  of 

an  ordinary  affidavit  in  a  personal  action.  It  has,  however,  been  settled, 
that  affidavits  not  entitled  ''  In  the  Queen's  Bench,"  and  sworn  before  A. 
B.,  a  commissioner,  &c.,  without  stating  him  to  be  a  commissioner  of  such 
Court,  cannot  be  read ;  but  those  sworn  in  Court,  or  before  a  Judge  of 
the  Court,  though  not  entitled  in  the  Court,  may  be  read. (if)  So  when 
sworn  before  a  commissioner,  the  jurat  must  contain  the  place  where  sworn, 
otherwise  it  cannot  be  read.(«) 

*The  affidavits  need  not  be  stamped. (v) 

["^ioj      -|     ]?-ii^ig^ — The  affidavits  should,  as  on  motions  in  civil 

cases,  be  filed,  and  under  special  circumstances,  or  in  the  case  of  enlarged 
rules,  the  Court  will  name  a  time  before  which  all  affidavits  intended  to 
be  used  must  be  filed. (ir)  Office  copies  of  such  affidavits  may  be  obtained 
at  the  Crown  Office,  on  payment  of  2s.  Gf/.,  if  under  five  folios,  and  of  6(/. 
per  folio,  if  over  that  sum.(.>-) 

Affidavits,  although  they  have  been  once  used  and  filed,  may  be  again 
used,  on  any  subsequent  occasion,  in  the  same  matter,(,y)  by  or  against 
either  party.(;2)  Thus,  where  a  rule  nisi  is  discharged,  and  an  application 
in  another  form  is  made,  the  affidavits  upon  which  the  first  rule  was  moved, 
may  be  used  and  read. (a) 

.]     Amendment  fjf. — The  Court  will,  on  motion,  and  a  proper  case 

shewn,  allow  the  prosecutor  to  enlarge  the  rule  for  the  writ  until  the  fol- 
lowing Term,  and  in  the  mean  time  to  amend  the  title  of  an  affidavit,  on 
which  the  rule  was  obtained ;  and  for  that  purpose  to  take  it  off  the  file, 
and  reswear  it  on  payment  of  costs,  the  defendant  having  leave  to  file  affi- 
davits in  reply. (/>) 

Costs.]      ^yllen  granted. — As  to  costs  after  verdict  on  a  traverse  to  a 

S.  C.  1  W.  W.  &  D.  142.  The  rule  which  prevails  when  a  criminal  information  is 
moved  for  does  not  apply  to  applications  for  a  mandamus. 

(r)  See  ante,  p.  295,  n.  (wt).     R.  v.  Mirehouse,  2  A.  &  E.  63G.f 

(s)  R.  V.  Mein,  3  T.  R.  596. 

[t)  R.  T.  Hare,  13  East,  188.  Kennet  v.  Avon  Canal,  T  T.  R.  451.  And  see  White 
v.  Irving,  2  M.  &  W.  127.- 

The  rule  of  R.  G.,  H.  T.,  2  Wm.  4,  s.  6,  as  to  swearing  affidavits  before  the  attor- 
ney in  the  cause,  does  not  ai)ply  to  proceedings  on  the  Crown  side  of  the  Court 
of  B.  R.  ;  1  D.,  N.  S.  865. 

(w)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  3  M.  &  S.  493. 

\v)  Stat.  4  &  5  Vict.  c.  34,  s.  1  ;  1  Q.  B.  453,  463,t  n.  (a).  S.  C.  1  G.  &D.  28 ; 
1  G.  &  D.  728.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  Gie.f     S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N.  S.  231,  Q.  B. 

(w)  Chit.  Prac.  1421,  8th  edit.     R.  v.  Middlesex  (J.),  1  Chit.  368. 

\x)  Cr.  Off.  R.,  r.  15,  App. 

\y)  R.  V.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  403.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524.f  And  see  10  A.  &  E.  732,t 
n.  (a).     R.  V.  Canterbury  (Archbishop),  15  East,  120. 

(z)  6  A.  &  E.  403.t     S.  C.  1  N.  k  P.  524,f  supra,  n.  (y). 

{a)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  1  Q.  B.  G29.t     S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  198. 

(6)  See  ante,  p.  295,  n.  ( /),  (/).  R.  v.  Warwicksh.  (J.),  5  D.  382.  And  sec  3  A. 
&  E.  419.t     S.  C,  3  N.  &  P.  439. 


VARIOUS     PROCEEDINGS.  451 

return,  under  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  1,  extended  by  stat.  1  Wra.  4,  c.  21, 
s.  3  (fO,  see  ante,  p.  392,  394,  395. 

As  to  the  costs  of  ministerial  offices,  &c.,  in  cases  within  the  stat.  1 
Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4,(c?)  see  ante  p.  394. 

As  to  costs  of  a  demurrer  to  a  return,  under  stat.  G  &  7  Vict.  c.  G7,  s. 
l,(e)  see  ante,  p.  378,  380,  381. 

As  to  costs  of  a  writ  of  error,  brought  by  virtue  of  stat.  G  &  7  Vict.  c. 
67  s.  2,(/)  see  ante,  p.  389,  399. 

*Notwithstanding  the  above  statutory  provisions  it  was  found,  p^,-,p-, 
that  the  subject  of  costs  had  not  been  provided  for  in  many  cases,  ■-  -• 
among  others,  where  the  prosecutor  failed  to  issue  his  writ  after  he  had 
put  the  defendant  to  the  expense  of  opposing  the  rule  nisi,  &c.,  it  was, 
therefore,  enacted,  by  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  6,  extended  by  stat.  9  &  10 
Vict.  c.  113,  s.  5,  to  Ireland,  for  the  purpose  of  making  some  further  pro- 
vision for  the  payment  of  costs  on  applications  for  mandamus.  That  in 
all  cases  of  applications  for  any  writ  of  mandamus  whatsoever,  the  costs  of 
such  application  whether  the  writ  shall  be  granted  or  refused,  and  also  the 
costs  of  the  writ  if  the  same  shall  be  issued  and  obeyed,  shall  be  in  the  dis- 
cretion of  the  Co\iYt,(ff)  and  the  Court  is  thereby  authorized  to  order  and 
direct  by  whom  and  to  whom  the  same  shall  be  paid.  Under  the  same 
statute  as  we  have  just  seen,(/()  the  Court  may  also  in  its  discretion,  order 
third  parties  to  pay  costs  including  those  of  both  writs,  although  it  be  not 
expressed  in  such  return  that  it  was  made  on  behalf  of  such  third  parties,  (t) 
Such  statute,  has  however,  been  held  not  to  apply  to  cases  where  the 
proceedings  for  the  writ  had  commenced  before  such  statute  came  into 
force,  (i/). 

Among  the  general  rules  which  guide  the  discretion  of  the  Court  in 
granting  or  refusing  costs  are  the  following,  viz.  that  costs  are  awarded  to 
the  successful  party,  unless  strong  grounds  of  exemption  be  shewn, (j) 
although  the  mandamus  may  have  been  obeyed  and  no  return  made.(^y) 

(c)  See  stats.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  2,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c. 
113,  App. 

(d)  See  stat.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  a  similar  enactment  stat.  9  &  10  Yict.  c. 
113,  s.  3,  App. 

(e)  See  stat.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  a  similar  enactment  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c. 
113,  s.  6,  App. 

(/)  See  stat.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  a  similar  enactment  stat.  9  &  10  Yict.  c. 
113,  s.  7,  App. 

(ff)  See  stats.  App.  R.  v.  Oundle  (Manor),  1  A.  &  E.  299,t  n.  (o).  R.  v.  St. 
Saviour's,  "7  A.  &  E.  948,  550.t  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P.  126.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  496.f  See 
8  A.  &  E.  87l,f  (a).  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  1  D.  &  M.  590.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  1,  lO.f 
S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  170.     R.  V.  Surrey  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  IIV,  M.  C. 

(h)  Supra,  n.  {(/) 

h)  R.  V.  West  Riding  (J.),  1  D.  &  M.  590.  S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  1,+  where  see  form  of  rule. 

s.  c.  3  G.  &  D.  no. 

(ii)  R.  V.  Wix  (Inhabs.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  203,  204.  R.  v.  Hungerford  Market,  2  B.  & 
Ad.  204,-)-  n.  (a),  348,  n.  (a).    As  to  costs  in  general,  see  Chit.  Prac.  1359. 

(j)  R.  V.  Stephens,  Sir  T.  Jon.  177.  R.  v.  Eastern  Counties  Railway,  2  Q.  B. 
578.t  S.  C.  11  L.  J.,  N.  S.  178,  Q.  B.  R.  v.  Newbury  (Mayor),  1  Q.  B.  751,  7G5.t 
S.  C.  1  G.  &  D.  388.  R.  v.  West  Riding  (J.),  5  Q.  B.  ll.f  S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  170.  S. 
C.  1  D.  &  M.  590.  R.  V.  Newcastle  (Mayor),  1  Q.  B.  751.t  S.  C.  1  G  &  D.  388. 
R.  v.  Surrey  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  117,  M.  C.  {jj)  1  A  &  E.  286,t  n.  (d). 


452  tapping's    mandamus. 

So,  if  the  prosecutor  make  an  experimental  motion  and  fail,  the  Court 
will  award  costs  to  the  defendant, (/j)  unless  the  case  be  a  doubtful  one,  or 
one  in  which  the  decision  of  a  Court  of  Law  is  required  as  a  guide  for 
future  cases. (^) 

r*J.T'i  *-^*'  ^^  ^^^^  ^  general  rule  on  this  subject,  that  where  the  dcfend- 
ant  by  the  want  of  fulness  in  his  return,  has  to  a  certain  extent 
misled  the  prosecutor,  the  Court  in  its  discretion  will  not  grant  him  the 
costs  of  his  defence. (»t)  Thus,  where  cause  was  shewn  against  a  rule 
nisi  for  a  writ  of  mandamus  against  churchwardens,  and  no  objection  was 
made,  that  under  a  local  act  of  Parliament  which  was  also  a  public  one, 
the  directors  of  the  poor  were  responsible  for  the  matter  sought  by  the 
writ  to  be  enforced,  v/hich  being  granted,  upon  the  return  thereto,  such 
objection  was  successfully  raised,  the  Court  in  its  discretion  refused  to 
compel  the  prosecutor  to  pay  the  costs  incurred  antecedently  to  the 
return,  because  after  the  rule  granted^  reasonable  grounds  existed  for  pro- 
secuting the  writ.(?() 

It  is  also  a  general  rule,  that  where  a  judicial  decision  has  been  given, 
the  party  who  comes  forward  only  to  defend  a  judgment  in  his  favour, 
and  which  he  is  entitled  to  suppose  a  right  one,  shall  not  pay  costs. 
Thus,  where  on  the  trial  of  a  writ  of  inquiry  under  a  railway  act,  the 
sheriff  stopped  the  case  on  a  preliminary  objection,  whereupon  a  rule 
havino-  been  obtained,  calling  on  the  sheriff  to  shew  cause  why  a  manda- 
mus should  not  issue,  directing  him  to  proceed  with  the  inquiry,  &c., 
which  notwithstanding  the  railway  company  opposed,  yet  the  writ  issued, 
and  was  obeyed,  the  Court  refused  to  award  the  costs  against  the  com- 
pany, (o) 

Although  it  is  a  general  rule,  that  if  in  moving  for  a  mandamus  the 
costs  of  the  application  be  included,  then  the  party  so  moving  must  run 
the  risk  of  paying  costs,  if  the  rule  be  refused  ;(p)  yet  in  some  cases, 
where  a  rule  is  moved  with  costs,  the  Court  in  discharging  it  will  not  in 
its  discretion  grant  them  to  the  successful  party. (j) 

(k)  See  ante,  p.  30G.  R.  v.  Heywood,  1  M.  &  S.  G30.  R.  v.  Merchant  Tailors' 
Company,  2  B.  &  Ad.  ISO.f  per  Tenderden,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Bankes,  Burr.  1453.  R.  r. 
Chester  (Ep.),  1  T.  R.  396.     R.  v.  Harrison,  IG  L.  J..  N.  S.  33,  M.  C. 

(?)  See  ante,  p.  49,  n.  [q),  (r),  306.  R.  v.  Rje  Harbour,  5  B.  &  Ad.  1094,f  n. 
R.  V.  Oundle  (Manor),  1  A.  &  E.  290,t  n.,  299.  S.  C.  3  N.  &  M.  484.t  R.  v.  Thames 
Navigation,  5  A.  &  E.'  Sll.f  R.  v.  Saviour's,  3  N.  &  P.  354.  R.  v.  West  Riding 
(J.),  5  Q.  B.  ll.f  S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  170.  S.  C.  1  D.  &  M.  590.  And  see  1  T.  R. 
396,  and  15  East,  158  ;  8  A.  &  E.  871,1  (o).  R.  v.  Hull  Railway,  13  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
257,  Q.  B.  S.  C.  8  Jur.  491.     S.  C.  6  Q.  B.  70. 

(m)  II.  V.  Round,  4  A.  &  E.  139.t  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  427-1  And  see  6  A.  &  E. 
406.t     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524.t 

In)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  2  D.,  N.  S.  955. 

(o)  R.  V.  Middlesex  (Sheriff),  5  Q.  B.  3C5.f  S.  C.  3  G.  &  D.  549.  S.  C.  13  L. 
J.,  N.  S.  14,  Q.  B.,  citing-  R.  v.  Bingham,  4  Q.  B.  877  ;f  qu.  whether  the  company, 
not  being  immediate  parties  to  the  rule,  were  liable  to  costs.  But  see  R.  v.  Sur- 
rey (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S.  117,  M.  C,  and  post,  p.  419,  n.  (i). 

{p)  R.  v.  Kirke,  5  B.  &  Ad.  1092.f  R.  v.  Glamorganshire  (J.),  15  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
110,  M.  C. 

{q)  R.  T.  Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  40C.f     S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524.f     S.  C.  1  W.  W.  &  D.  99. 


VARIOUS     PROCEEDINGS.  453 

A  defendant  is  entitled  to  treble  costs  on  a  mandamus,  if  lais  act  be  a 
thing  done  in  pursuance  of  a  statute,  which  gives  such  treble  costs. (r) 

A  party  who  has  obtained   a  mandamus   to  restore  him  to  an  office, 
*cannot  recover  the  costs  of  the  application  as  consequential  dam-  r>>;4.]^g-| 
ao-es  in  an  action  for  the  amotion,  indeed  such  an  action  cannot  be 
maintained,  unless  it  appear  that  the  defendants  were  individually  and 
maliciously  active  in  procuring  the  amotion. (.s) 

.]     Against  whom — Bishop. — See  that  title. 

.]       Corporation  Munici^oal. — The    Court   has   in    its  discretion 

under  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  6,  ordered  the  council  of  a  borough  corpo- 
ration to  pay  the  costs  incident  to  a  mandamus,  and  to  the  application 
for  costs,  notwithstanding  the  delay  which  occasioned  the  writ  arose  from 
a  doubt  on  the  part  of  the  council,  whether  the  vacancy  under  discussion 
was  an  extraordinari/  one,  upon  which  point  counsel  had  erroneously 
advised  them.(^) 

When  the  application  is  made  against  the  council  of  a  municipal  cor- 
poration, the  rule,  if  granted,  should  not  be  drawn  up  for  payment  of  the 
costs  "out  of  the  borough  fund,"  notwithstanding  such  expenses  are  of 
right  payable  out  of  that  fund.(?0  The  Court  will  however  mould  the 
rule  nisi  in  this  respect,  and  make  it  absolute  against  the  defendants 
generally,  for  the  Court  will  act  on  so  much  only  of  the  rule  as  is  good,(z;) 
and  this,  although  the  only  application  for  payment  have  specifically 
required  payment  by  the  council  out  of  the  borough  fund. 

.]     Justices. — When  a  rule  or  any  application  against  justices  is 

discharged,  it  is  a  matter  of  course  that  costs  are  awarded  to  them  if 
cause  have  been  shewn  on  their  behalf,  or  they  have  been  put  to  any 
expense. (i(j)  If,  however,  the  point  raised  be  one  fairly  admitting  of  dis- 
cussion, the  Court  will  exercise  its  discretion  as  to  the  costs. (.t)  But 
where  a  rule  nisi  for  a  writ  to  justices  is  discharged  with  costs  to  be 
paid  by  the  prosecutor,  the  parish  which  appeared  to  support  the  refusal 
of  the  justices  is  not  entitled  to  costs  under  the  above  principle,  although 
served  with  the  rule  nisi,  notwithstanding  the  justices  did  not  appear  by 
counsel,  (y) 

.]      Inhahitants. — Where   a  mandamus  is   obtained  against    the 

(r)  R.  V.  Kelk,  1  G.  &  D.  127.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  eeO.f     S.  C.  5  Jur.  888. 

(s)  Harman  v.  Tappcnden,  3  Esp.  278.     S.  C.  3  Esp.,  278,  ante,  p.  403. 

(t)  R.  V.  Cambridge  (Mayor),  4  Q.  B.  BOl.f     S.  C.  14  L.  .L,  N.  S.  82,  Q.  B. 

{u)  4  Q.  B.  801,f  supra,  n.  {t).  As  toAvhat  payments  the  borough  fund  is  charge- 
able with,  see  R.  V.  Leeds  (Mayor),  4  Q.  B.  796,f  and  cases  there  cited. 

(v)  4  Q.  B.  805,f  supra,  n.  [t).     Ex  parte  Turner,  1  W.  W.  &  H.  305. 

Uv)  See  ante,  p.  49,  n.  (q).  R.  v.  Devon  (J.),  1  Chit.  38.f  R.  v.  Worcester- 
shire (J.),  2  B.  &  A.  233,f  per  Abbott,  C.  J.  R.  v.  Mirehouse,  2  A.  &  E.  644.t  S. 
C.  4  N.  &  M.  394.t  R.  v.  Grearae,  2  A.  &  E.  618.t  R.  v.  Dyer,  2  A.  &  E.  CU.f  S. 
C.  4  N.  &  M.  550.}     R.  v.  Stafford  (J.),  5  N.  &  M.  lOO.f  per  Denman,  C.  J.     S.  C. 

3  A.  &  E.  425.1  R.  V.  Mills,  2  B.  &  Ad.  581. f  R.  v.  Hughes,  3  A.  &  E.  432.f  S. 
C.  5  N.  &  M.  94.f     See  post,  p.  419,  n.  {b). 

(x)  2  A.  &  E.  GOe.f    S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  550,t  supra,  n.  (w).    R.  v.  Cambridge  (.J.), 

4  N.  &  M.  438.t     S.  C.  2  A.  &  E.  370.f     See  ante,  p.  49,  n.  (r). 

(y)  R.  V.  Stalfordsh.  (J.),  1  D.  507.  R.  v.  Momnouthsh.  (.].),  1  B.  &  Ad.  895.1 
And  see  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  6,  App. 


454  tapping's    mandamus. 

r*nm  *inliii1^itants  of  a  parish,  &c.,  the  Court  will  make  the  rule  for 
costs  absolute,  agaiust  those  only  who  have  caused  the  costs.  Thus, 
where,  a  return  by  inhabitants  was  quashed,  the  Court  in  granting  the 
costs  ascertained  which  of  the  inhabitants  joined  in  making  the  return, 
and  made  the  rule  for  costs  absolute  against  them  only.  (2)  The  Court 
will,  on  a  proper  case,  order  churchwardens,  &c.,  as  such  to  pay  the  costs, 
but  not  to  be  personally  liable. 

.]      Officers,  &c. — Where  public  functionaries,  such  as  clergymen, 

schoolmasters,  &c.,  endowed  under  an  act  of  Parliament,  are  obliged  to 
come  before  the  Court  for  a  mandamus  to  obtain  their  dues  under  the 
act,  the  Court  will  award  costs  to  them,  (a)  So,  where  a  public  officer 
has  decided  as  the  Court  thinks  rightly,  it  is  proper  to,  and  the  Court 
will  give  him  his  costs,  for  if  an  officer,  required  by  law  to  pronounce  a 
decision,  be  brought  before  the  Court  by  a  motion  impugning  such  deci- 
sion, the  general  rule  is,  that  he  shall  have  his  costs  if  the  application 
fail.(6) 

Officers,  whose  functions  are  merely  ministerial,  are  protected  by  stat. 
1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4,  against  the  payment  of  costs  and  damages  in  cer- 
tain cases  where  writs  of  mandamus  are  directed  to  them.(c) 

.]     How  obtained — Motion. — Before  the  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s. 

6,  uo  application  for  costs  was  necessary  where  there  was  a  successful 
action  for  a  false  return,  or  where  a  traverse  was  taken  and  found  for 
the  prosecutor,  because  under  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  2,  the  costs  of 
obtaining  the  writ  were  included  either  in  the  costs  of  the  action,  or  in 
those  of  the  traverse,  on  the  granting  of  the  peremptory  writ.(o?)  But  as 
there  were  no  means  of  giving  costs  to  the  prosecutor,  where  for  instance 
the  writ  was  obeyed,  or  where  the  return  was  quashed,  or  to  the  defend- 
ant when  the  return  was  held  good,  these  cases  were  provided  for  by  the 
former  statute,  s.  6  ;(e)  therefore,  in  such  cases  the  costs  are  obtained 
by  a  distinct  motion  to  the  Court,(/)  they  having  been  previously  de- 
manded.(^) 

(z)  R.  v.  St.  Saviour's,  3  N.  &  P.  126,  354.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  496.f  S.  C.  *?  A.  & 
E.  925.t     And  see  5  Q.  B.  13.t 

(a)  R.  T.  St.  Saviour's  Parish,  3  N.  &  P.  345.     S.  C.  Y  A.  &  E.  925.f 

(b)  R.  v.  Bridgenorth  (Mayor),  2  P.  &;  D.  318.  S.  C.  10  A.  &  E.  lO.f  R.  v. 
Oxford  (Mayor),  1  N.  &  P.  479.f     S.  C.  6  A.  &  E.  349,t  ante,  p.  417,  n.  (0). 

(c)  See  ante,  p.  342,  343.  See  stats.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9  &  10  Vict, 
c.  113,  App. 

(d)  See  ante,  p.  404,  405. 

(e)  See  stat.  App.  See  ante,  p.  405.  R.  v.  Fall,  1  Q.  B.  650,  651.f  S.  C.  1  G. 
&  D.  117.     S.  C.  5  Jur.  887.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  App. 

(/)  R.  V.  St.  Pancras,  2  D.,  N.  S.  955.  See  3  A.  &  E.  286,t  (d).  See  8  A.  &  E. 
87l.t  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  172.  R.  V.  Wix  (Inhabs.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  197,  203.f  See  form 
of  rule,  2  A.  &  E.  370.t  S.  C.  4  N.  &  M.  438  ;t  7  A.  &  E.  948.t  S.  C.  3  N.  &  P. 
126.  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  496).f  Ex  parte  Davies,  5  B.  &  Ad.  1091,t  n.  (a).  R.  v. 
Kirke,  5  B.  &  Ad.  1089,  1094,t  n.  (^0  i  2  B.  &  Ad.  204,f  n.  (a),  348,  n.  (a).  R.  v. 
Thames  Commissoners,  8  A.  &  E.  yOo.f 

[ff)  R.  V.  Scott,  1  D.  &  L.  212.  See  ante,  p.  418,  n.  (v),  post,  p.  420,  n.  [i],  and 
tit.  "  Demand  and  Refusal." 


VARIOUS     PROCEEDINGS.  455 

* .     Affidavits  in  support  of  M<Aion. — The  affidavits  in  sup-  r^,  ,.,j-,, 

port  of  tbe  motion  should  shew  what  has  been  done  on  the  writ,  I-  "  J 
for  a  return  may  have  been  made,  and  till  the  result  of  the  whole  pro- 
ceeding is  before  the  Court,  there  are  no  proper  means  whereby  to  ascer- 
tain whether  or  not  the  case  be  a  fit  one  for  costs. (A)  The  affidavits 
should  also  shew  that  the  costs  were  demanded  before  the  motion 
made.(i) 

The  Court  will  iu  deciding  upon  the  application,  refer  for  its  guidance 
to  the  alfidavits  filed  in  support  of  the  application  for  the  writ,  if  it  be 
clear  that  both  applications  are  made  between  the  same  parties ;{])  the 
applicant  cannot  however  refer  to  such  affidavits,  unless  the  rule  for  costs 
be  drawn  up  on  reading  such  affidavits,  as  it  would  be  very  embarrassing 
to  those  shewing  cause,  if  a  rule  could  be  supported  by  affidavits,  of  which 
no  notice  has  been  given.  The  practice  upon  this  point(/i)  is  settled  by 
a  rule  of  Court  of  Easter  Term,  1843,  by  which  it  is  ordered,  that  in 
every  case  in  which  the  Court  shall  grant  a  rule  for  the  payment  of  costs 
incurred  by  the  application,  for  any  writ  of  mandamus,  or  the  proceed- 
in^s  thereon,  or  to  compel  any  person  not  a  party  to  an  original  rule,  to 
pay  the  costs  of  such  original  rule,  such  rule  for  costs  shall  be  drawn 
upon  reading  all  the  affidavits  filed  in  support  of  and  in  opposition  to  the 
original  rule.(?) 

If  the  affidavits  be  defective,  the  Court  will  dismiss  the  application, 
but  if  the  rule  be  discharged  on  the  ground  that  the  affidavit  on  which  it 
was  moved  was  defectively  entitled,  or  the  jurat  defective,  the  Court  will 
hear  a  fresh  application,  but  not  where  the  defect  of  form  is  in  the  body 
of  the  affidavit.(??i)  Thus,  where  such  an  affidavit  was  wrongly  entitled 
"The  Queen  against  The  Directors  of  the  Great  Western  Railway  Com- 
pany," instead  of  "The  Queen  v.  The  Great  Western  Railway  Com- 
pany," and  also  at  the  beginning  recited,  that  a  mandamus  had  been 
obtained  "  against  the  directors  of  the  company,"  whereupon  the  rule  had 
been  discharged,  the  Court  refused  to  hear  a  fresh  application,  shewing 
no  ground  of  application  which  might  not  have  been  presented  before,  the 
same  affidavits  being  used  with  these  defects  *amended;(n)  for  a 
second  motion,  for  costs  cannot  be  made  on  affidavits  corrected  L  J 
in  the  title  and  body  as  to  the  description  of  the  defendants,  though  not 
altered  in  any  other  material  respect. 

(A)  R.  V.  Bingham,  4  Q.  B.  8T7.f     See  R.  v.  Thames  Commissioners,  8  A.  &  E. 

901,t  Q-  (^)- 

({)  R.  T.  Scott,  1  D.  &  L.  212. 

{j)  R.  V.  Kirke,  5  B.  &  Ad.  1089,  1093.f     See  ante,  p.  415,  n.  (?/). 

[k]  R.  V.  St.  Peter's  Coll.,  1  Q.  B.  SU.f  R.  v.  Kirke,  5  B.  &  Ad.  1089,t  being 
referred  to  by  the  officers  of  the  Court,  which  the  Court  said  came  on  late  on  the 
last  day  of  Term,  and  was  not  much  considered. 

[I)  4  Q.  B.  653,t  infra,  n.  (o). 

(?«)  See  ante,  p.  294,  295.  R.  v.  Great  Western  Railway,  1  D.  &  M.  471.  S.  C. 
5  Q.  B.  597.t  S.  C.  1  D.  &  L.  874.  R.  v.  Harnham  Roads,  5  Jur.  408.  R.  v.  War- 
wicksh.  (J.),  5  D.  382.  R.  v.  Manchester  Railway,  8  A.  &  E.  413,  427.t  S.  C.  3 
N.  k  P.  439.  R.  V.  Deptford  Pier,  8  A.  &  E.  910,  917.1  S.  C.  1  P.  &  D.  128.  For 
the  form  of  affidavits  in  general,  see  tit.  "Affidavits,"  ante,  p.  413 — 415. 

(«)   1  D.  &  M.  471.     S.  C.  5  Q.  B.  597.1    S.  C.  1  D.  &  L.  864,  supra,  n.  [m]. 


456  tapping's    mandamus. 

.]     Rule  Nisi,  Form  o/.— But  by  the  rule  E.  T.,  1843. (o)     It  is 


ordered  that  in  every  case  in  which  the  Court  shall  grant  a  rule  for  the 
payment  of  costs,  occasioned  by  the  application  for  any  writ  of  mandamus, 
or  the  proceedings  thereon,  or  to  compel  any  person  not  a  party  to  an 
original  rule,  to  pay  the  costs  of  such  original  rule,  such  rule  for  costs  shall 
be  drawn  np  on  reading  all  the  affidavits  filed  in  support  of  and  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  original  rule.(j)) 

.]     Security  for    Costs. — Security  for  costs  may  be  obtained  in 

mandamus  cases  as  in  personal  action,  but  the  Court  will  not  compel  an 
interested  relator  in  a  mandamus  to  give  security  for  costs  on  the  ground 
of  his  poverty,  or  that  other  persons  have  induced  him  to  apply  for  the 
writ.(</) 

.]     Forma  Paujjeris. — The  Court  upon  a  proper  case  made,  will 

allow  the  prosecutor  to  prosecute  the  writ  in  forma  pauperis. (r) 

.]     Taxation. — The  costs  are  taxed  at  the  Crown  Office  by  the 

Queen's  coroner  and  attorney  or  Master  in  the  Crown  Office,  on  an  ap- 
pointment made  for  that  purpose,  which  is  obtained  at  the  Crown  Office, 
no  allocatur  is  given,  but  the  amount,  when  ascertained,  is  inserted  in  the 
judgment  roll.(s) 

Attachment.]  Nature  of. — Any  contempt  of  Court  is  punish- 
able by  attachment ;  and  the  neglect  of  a  mandamus,  as  by  not  making 
a  return  to  it  has  been  by  many  authorities  declared  to  be  such  a  con- 
tempt.(;) 

The  attachment  which  issues  for  not  returning  a  mandamus  is,  as  before 

stated,  a  writ  on  contempt,  in  nature  of  an  execution,  and  so  not  bailable  by 

r*4.991  ^^^  sheriff;   therefore,  if  the  sherifi"  should  in  such  a  *case,  take 

bail,  it  is  a  misdemeanor  for  which  an  attachment  will  be  granted 

against  him.(w) 

.]  When  granted. — If  no  return  be  made,  the  Court  will,  on  affi- 
davit of  personal  service  of  the  writ,  without  a  rule  to  return  it,  grant  an 
attachment.(t;)     "Where  the  service  has  not   been   personal,  a  side  bar 

(o)  4  Q.  B.  653,f  supra,  n.  {!). 
(p)  Ante,  p.  430,  n.  (l). 

(q)  R.  V.  Malmesbury  (Mayor),  9  D.  359.  S.  C.  5  Jur.  3GG.  S.  C.  10  L.  J.,  N.  S. 
129  Q.  B.     See  Chit.  Prac.  1230.    A  mandamus  maybe  sued  out  in  forma  pauperis, 

9  D.  359,  infra,  n.  (r). 

(?•)  Dr.  P>ee  v.  St.  John's  Coll.,  cited  9  D.  3G1.     Sec  Chit.  Prac.  1121,  8th  edit. 

(s)  Corn.  Cr.  Prac.  99.     See  ante,  lit.  "Judgment,"  p.  395,  397. 

(t)  R.  V.  Heathcote,  10  Mod.  56.  R.  v.  Rye  (Mayor),  Burr.  798.  R.  v.  Wix  (In- 
habs.),  2  B.  &  Ad.  203. f  There  were  formerly  two  sorts  of  attachment  upon  a 
mandatory  -writ,  viz.,  one  which  punished  the  contempt  which  was  awarded  on  the 
neglect  of  an  alias  writ,  and  the  other,  which  entitled  the  party  to  his  action  for 
damages,  which  was  granted  for  delaying  the  execution  of  the  plurieswrit.  Anon., 
12  Mod.  164.     Anon.  12  Mod.  348. 

As  to  the  general  practice  of  attachments,  see  Chit.  Prac.  1516,  8th  edit. 

(m)  R.  v.  Baskerville,  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (H.) 

{v)  Ante  p.  6,  n.  (o),  344,  n.  (rf).  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  Palm.  451,  the  Court 
also  fined  the  Mayor  5/.     See  R.  v.  Evesham  (Corp.),  Kel.  144.     R.  v.   Heathcote, 

10  Mod.  56.  R.  V.  Rye  (Mayor),  Burr.  708.  S.  C.  2  Ld.  Ken.  468.  R.  v.  AVix  (In- 
habs.),  2  B.  k  Ad.  203. f     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (H.) 


VARIOUS     PROCEEDINGS.  457 

T\i\c(io)  to  return  tlie  writ  must  have  been  obtained,  and  personally  served 
upon  the  defendant,  upon  which,  if  disregarded,  an  attachment  may  be 
obtained. 

At  common  law  the  general  practice  was,  that  if  no  return  were  made 
to  a  mandamus,  the  Court  would  usually  award  an  alias  and  pluries,  but 
on  default  of  a  return  to  the  pluries,  the  Court,  on  production  of  an  aiTi- 
davit  of  service,  granted  an  attachment  without  hearing  counsel  to  excuse 
the  contempt. (.f)  The  Court  would,  however,  usually  grant  a  little  time, 
viz.  two  or  three  days,  for  the  return  of  each  writ.(^)  After  the  passing 
of  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  1,  and  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  s.  9,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c. 
21,  which  directed  that  the  first  writ  of  mandamus,  in  all  cases,  should  be 
returned  ;  a  neglect  so  to  do  rendered  the  defendant  liable  to  an  attach- 
ment, although  in  practice  it  was  not  granted  without  a  peremptory  rule 
to  return  the  writ. (2) 

So,  an  attachment  will  be  granted,  if  a  frivolous  return  be  made.(rt)  So, 
if  the  defendant  contemptuously  make  an  insufficient  return.  Thus,  if 
upon  the  disallowance  of  one  return,  a  second  bad  one  be  made,  the  Court 
will  grant  an  attachment. (6) 

So,  if  the  peremptory  writ  be  not  obeyed,  an  attachment  may  issue. (^O 
Thus,  where  the  defendants  had  evaded  signing  a  poor's  rate,  in  obedience 
to  a  writ  of  mandamus,  by  keeping  out  of  the  way  *so  as  not  to  be  r#^231 
served  with  the  writ,  an  attachment  was  granted  for  the  con- 
tempt, (t?) 

.]     How  ohtaincd — Motion. — The    writ  is  obtained   on   motion, 

supported  by  the  necessary  affidavits.  There  must  be  an  affidavit  or  affi- 
davits of  service  of  the  writ,  or  copies  thereof;  although  the  Court  will, 
in  its  discretion,  enlarge  the  rule  a  few  days,  to  admit  of  such  affidavit  of 
service. ((')  Where  the  writ  is  served  on  all  those  to  whom  it  is  directed, 
and  where  an  attachment  is  desired  against  all  of  them,  it  is  enough  to 
produce  an  affidavit  of  service  at  the  time  of  shewing  cause  upon  the 
attachment,  if  the  other  side  call  for  it.  But  where  the  writ  is  not  serv- 
ed upon  all,  and  an  attachment  is  sought  only  against  those  who  have 

(w)  Cr.  Off.  Rul.  r.  13,  App.  See  ante,  p.  344,  345.  The  more  usual  practice  is, 
however,  to  sign  judgment  by  default.     See  ante,  p.  386,  387. 

(x)  See  ante,  p.  333.  R.  v.  Tlietford  (Mayor),  6  Mod.  25.  R.  r.  Winton,  5  T.  R. 
89.  Anon.  2  Salk.  434.  R.  v.  Oxford  (Mayor),  Palm.  455  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  '-Man." 
D.  6  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  203.  Sometimes  an  attachment  was  granted  for  not  returning 
the  first  writ.     Comb.  234.     Sec  ante,  p.  344,  345. 

(y)  Per  Holt,  C.  J.,  6  Mod.  Ca.  25  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  6.  Anon.  12  Mod. 
164.     R.  V.  Owen,  Skin.  669. 

{z)  Ante,  p.  333,  344,  345.  Mayor  of  Coventry's  case,  2  Salk.  429  ;  6  Mod.  Cas. 
25  ;  Skin.  669  ;  Palm.  455. 

(a)  See  ante,  p.  352,  n.  (/■).     R.  v.  Robinson,  8  Mod.  3G6. 

{h)  Bull.  N.  P.  197,  198.  Anon.  12  Mod.  410.  S.  C.  Nom.  Lord  v.  Francis.  Holt, 
170,  171. 

(c)  Ante,  p.  408.  R.  v.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  728.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  GlG.f  S.  C. 
10  L.  S.,  N.  S.  198,  Q.  B. 

{d)  R.  T.  Edwards,  1  W.  Blac.  636.  S.  C.  Burr.  2105.  See  also  R.  v.  Wheeler, 
1  W.  Blac.  331.     R.  v.  Elki^ns,  1  W.  Blac.  640.     See  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Attachment."' 

(e)  See  ante,  p.  344,  345,  346.  R.  v.  Esham  (Mayor),  2  Barn.  265.  The  affiavit 
should  be  correctly  entitled.     Sec  ante,  tit.  "Affidavits,"  313,  315. 


458  tapping's    mandamus. 

been  served,  it  lias  been  held,  that  tlie^  ouglit  to  Lave  an  opportunity  of 
answering  such  affidavit  of  the  special  service,  and,  therefore,  it  should 
be  produced  on  moving  for  the  rule.(/) 

The  affidavit  of  service  should  identify  the  defendants  to  be  those  who 
should  return  the  writ,  or  it  will  be  insufficient. (^) 

.]     Rule  Xm. — The  rule  is  an  ordinary  one,  and  nisi  in  the  first 

instance. 

.]     Shewing  Cause. — Any  substantial  objection   to  the  validity 

of  the  writ  may  be  taken,  on  shewing  cause  against  the  rule  for  an  attach- 
ment; for  such  an  objection,  if  it  had  been  previously  brought  to  the 
knowledge  of  the  Court,  must  have  prevailed,  so,  the  Court  is  bound  to 
abstain  from  enforcing  performance  of  such  writ ;  therefore,  an  attach- 
ment cannot  issue  if  the  writ  be  vicious,  as  for  instance,  if  it  be  miscon- 
ceived in  its  most  important  clause,  the  mandatory  part.(/i)  But  an 
objection  that  the  writ  does  not  contain  the  clause  "vel  causam  nobis 
signifieatis,"  is  one  of  which  the  Court,  before  return  made,  will  not  take 
cognizance.(/)  So,  where  it  was  objected  that  the  affidavit  of  service  was 
not  filed,  the  Court  overruled  the  objection. (J) 

The  rule  is  mad'e  absolute  or  discharged,  as  in  ordinary  cases. (Ar) 

If  the  affidavits  upon  which  the  rule  for  the  attachment  is  granted,  be 
r*i94.1  substantially  defective,  the  defendants  may  move  to  discharge  such 
L  "  J  >^j-xx\q^  though  no  cause  was  shewn  against  it.(/)  But  if  the  rule 
be  properly  obtained,  the  Court  will  seldom  discharge  it,  except  upon 
payment  of  costs. (m) 

.]  Form  of  Writ;  Defendants. — In  all  cases,  other  than  corpo- 
ration cases,  the  attachment  will  be  granted  against  all  those,  if  more  than 
one,  to  whom  the  writ  is  directed ;  though  when  they  are  before  the 
Court,  the  punishment  will  be  proportioned  to  the  offence  of  each.(n)  So, 
when  an  office  is  filled  by  two,  who  in  law  make  but  one  officer,  as  the 
sheriff  of  Middlesex,  the  attachment  must  be  granted  against  both,  though 
one  alone  be  morally  guilty  of  the  contempt.  Thus,  where  a  mandamus 
was  directed  to  two  bailiffs,  and  no  return  was  made,  the  Court  granted 
an  attachment  against  both  ;  though  affidavit  was  made,  that  one  was 
willing  to  make  a  return,  but  could  not,  because  the  other  had  got  the 
writ  into  his  hands,  and  would  not  relinquish  it.  The  Court,  in  giving 
judgment,  said,  they  were  both  to  be  considered  as  one  officer,  and  that  it 

(/)  R.  T.  Esliam  (Mayor),  2  Barn.  265. 

((/)  R.  V.  Newcastle-upoa-Tyne  (Corp.),  1  Barn.  385. 

(k)  R.  v.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  732.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  G16,t  per  Ld.  Denman, 
C.J.     S.  C.  10  L.  J.,'N.  S.  198,  Q.  B.     See  Chit.  Prac.  1523,  8th  edit. 

(?■)  R.  V.  Owen,  Skin.  6G9.     See  ante,  p.  32G. 

(J)  R.  V.  Evesham  (Corp.),  Kel.  244. 

{k)  R.  V.  Somerset  Sewers  (Commissioners),  1  East,  TO.  See  Chit.  Prac.  1523, 
8th  ed.     See  ante,  tit.  "Application"  (Rule),  p.  301,  307. 

(l)  R.  V.  Newcastle-upon-Tyne  (Corp.),  1  Barn.  385. 

(m)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  185. 

{„)  R.  V.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  729.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  610  tf  Bull.  N.  P.  201. 
See  G  Mod.  152;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (H.)  As  to  form  of  writ  in  general,  see 
Chit.  Prac.  1523,  8th  edit. 


COLLATERAL     PROCEEDINGS. 


459 


would  be  cudless  to  try  in  all  cases  wbicli  was  in  the  right. (o)  In  tlio 
case  of  a  mimicipal  corporation,  however,  the  attachment  will  be  granted 
a"-ainst  those  particular  individuals  only  who  refuse  to  execute  the  writ; 
and,  therefore,  they  alone  must  be  named  in  the  rule  for  the  attach- 
ment. (j>) 

The  writ  of  attachment  must  be  tested  and  made  returnable  on  a  day 
certain  in  Term  before  the  Queen  at  Westminster;  it  must  also  be  signed 
at  the  Crown  0&Lce,(q)  and  afterwards  sealed. (r) 

As  to  the  manner  of  executing  an  attachment,  see  Chit.  Prac.  1523, 
8th  edit. 


♦CHAPTER  THE  NINTH. 


[*425] 


OF    THE    COLLATERAL    PROCEEDINGS    BY  WAY  OP    ACTION,  OR   CRIMINAL 
INFORMATION  FOR  A  FALSE  RETURN  TO  A  WRIT  OP  MANDAMUS. 

Having  in  the  preceding  pages  shewn  how  a  return  to  a  writ  of  man- 
damus when  legally  insufficient,  may  be  invalidated  by  "  Motion  to 
Qaush,"(a)  or  "  Demurrer,"(i)  and  also  how,  since  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20 
(extended  by  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21, (c)),  the  truth  of  a  return  in  point  of 
fact  may  be  impeached  by  a  "  Plea,"  either  by  way  of  '' Traverse," (c/)  or 
"  Confession  and  Avoidance,"  it  is  proposed  in  the  present  Chapter  to 
treat  both  of  an  "  Action  on  the  Case,  and  a  Criminal  Information  for  a 
False  Return,"  which  at  common  law  were,  as  we  have  seen,(e)  the  only 
formulas  whereby  the  validity  of  such  a  return  in  point  of  fact  could  be 
tried  by  a  jury. 


Action  for  a  false  return  -  -  425 

What  a  false  return  -  -428 
Iq  what  Court  to  be  brought  -  429 

Plaintiffs        -         -  -  -  429 

Defendants    -         -  -  -  430 

Declaration    -         -  -  -  430 

Evidence,  &c.          -  -  -  431 

Verdict,  &c.  -         -  -  -  432 


Action,  &c. — Error,  &c.  -  -  432 

Costs  -         -  -  -  432 

Information  for  a  false  return  -  432 

When  it  lies  -  -  -  432 

Motion  _         _  _  -  433 

Venue  -         -  -  -  433 

Evidence        _         _  _  -  434 

Verdict  -         -  -  -  434 


We  now  come  to  treat  of  those  legal  formula;  which,  at  common  law, 


(o)  H.  V.  Bridgnorth  (Bailiffs),  1  Barn.  53.  S.  C.  Stra.  808  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  201 ; 
Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  6;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (H.) 

(p)  R.  v.  Poole  (Mayor),  1  G.  &  D.  728.  S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  eiG.f  S.  C.  9  L.  J.,  N. 
S.  231,  Q.  B. ;  Bull.  N.  P.  197,  198,  201  ;  Anon.  Comb.  327. 

(q)  Cr.  Off.  Rul.  r.  4,  App. 

(r)  See  tit.  "Writ"  (issuing),  ante,  p.  330,  also  Chit.  Prac.  1523,  1524,  8th  edit., 
and  cases  there  cited. 

(a)  See  ante,  p.  369,  372—375.  [h]  See  ante,  p.  369,  375—381. 

(c)  See  stats.  App.  As  to  Ireland,  see  stats.  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c. 
113,  App. 

(d)  Ante,  p.  385,  n.  (r).  (e)  Ante,  p.  6,  n.  (q),  (;•),  383,  n.  (a). 


4G0  TArriNo's    mandamus. 

were  the  only  proceedings  wliicli  the  prosecutor  could  adopt,  if  the  return, 
though  legally  sufficient,  vet  was  false  as  to  the  facts  upon  -which  such 
sufficiency  was  founded ;  in  order  to  fully  understand  which,  it  will  he 
necessary  shortly  to  premise  some  few  observations  upon  the  legal  history 
of  this  portion  of  our  subject. 

At  common  law,  it  will  be  remembered, (/)  a  return  to  a  mandamus 
r*lon  *"'^s  ^'^^  traversable ;  ((j)  because,  as  it  by  "  filing"  became  a 
^  "  record, (/i)  the  prosecutor  was  not  allowed  to  aver  against  the  truth 
of  it  :((■)  the  practical  effect  of  which  doctrine  was,  that  if  the  return  were 
good  in  law  upon  the  face  of  it,  though  false  in  fact,  the  prosecutor  was 
denied  all  relief  by  the  further  prosecution  of  his  writ,  because  he  was 
estopped  by  the  return ;  so  that  the  only  course  left  open  to  him  for  the 
wrong  done  him  by  the  defendant  of  thus  ousting  him  of  his  remedy 
by  mandamus  was,  that  he  could  maintain  against  him  an  action  on  the 
case,(y)  called  an  "action  for  a  false  return,"  which  in  form  and  effect 
was  no  other  than  the  ordinary  action  for  a  false  return,  to  v.-hich  sheriffs 
and  other  ministerial  officers  are  subjected,  when  they  by  a  false  return  to 
ordinary  judicial  writs,  &c.,  work  an  injury  to  another's  estate.  The  pro. 
secutor  could  not,  however,  avail  himself  of  this  common  law  remedy  of 
an  action,  (or  criminal  information  for  a  false  return, )(J)  until  the  Court 
had  upon  argument  adjudged  the  return  to  be  sufficient  in  law,  and  such 
judgment  had  been  formerly  entered  up;  because  the  prosecutor  could  not 
be  prejudiced  by  an  invalid  rctiirn,  as  he  might  proceed  to  quash  it;  also, 
if  previously  to  such  a  judgment,  an  action  were  commenced,  and  a  verdict 
and  damages  recovered,  for  instance,  for  a  loss  of  office,  and  the  prosecu- 
tor afterwards  succeeded  in  invalidating  the  return  upon  argument,  as  be- 
fore stated,  he  would  thereupon  be  restored  to  his  office,  and  also  retain 
the  damages  recovered  in  the  action  for  the  loss  of  his  place  :(/c)  therefore, 
the  prosecutor  was,  and  still  is  obliged  to  aver  in  his  declaration,  that  the 
return  has  been  held  to  be,  and  is  sufficient  in  law. 

The  common  law  being  therefore  so  oppressive,  dilatory,  and  expen- 
sive, as  almost  to  render  the  proceeding  by  mandamus  worthless,  the 
attention  of  the  Legislature  was  at  length  drawn  to  the  subject,  and  by 
the  passing  of  the  remedial  stat.  of  9  Ann.  e.  20.(/)  a  remedy  for  the 
grievance  was  provided,  but  in  the  cases  of  municipal  offices  only; 
which  statute,  after  reciting  that  persons  who  have  a  right  to  the  office 
of  maijors,  or  other  offices  within  cities,  towns  corporate,  boroughs,  and 


i^ 


(/)  Ante,  p.  6,  n.  [q),  (r),  383. 

\g)  5  N.  &  M.  427,t  n.  («).     R.  v.  noloies,  Burr.  1G44.     See  ante,  p.  383. 

(A)  See  ante,  p.  365,  n.  (n). 

(i)  R.  V.  Round,  4  A.  &  PI  ISO.f  S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  427,1  n.  (a).  And  see  Bagg's 
case,  11  Rep.  99,  b.  ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  G.  Rich  v.  Pilkingtou,  Carth.  171  ; 
Bull.  N.  P.  198 ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (L.) 

{j)  Or  a  criminal  information,  if  the  circumstances  warranted  it.     See  post. 

{k)  See  ante,  p.  383.  Enfield  v.  Hills,  2  Lev.  236,  238.  S.  C.  Sir  T.  Jon,  116. 
R.  V.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  276,  279.f  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  5  B.  &  Ad. 
233.t     Com.  Dig. 'tit.  '•  Mant"  D.  0. 

[I)  See  Stat.  App.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat.  9  &  10  Yict.  c.  113,  App. 


COLLATERAL  PROCEEDINGS.  4G1 

2)laccs,  or  to  be  hurycsses  or  freemen  thereof,  have  either  been  illegally 
turned  out,  or  have  beeu  refused  to  be  admitted  thereto,  and  have  no 
'''other  remedy  to  procure  themselves  to  be  admitted  or  restored,  r^joT-i 
than  by  writs  of  mandamus,  the  proceedings  on  which  are  very 
dilatory  and  expensive — enacted  :  that  the  persons  prosecuting  such  writ 
mv^y  plead  to  (that  is,  may  confess  and  avoid,)  or  traverse,  all  or  any  of 
the  material  facts  contained  within  the  return,  to  which  the  persons 
making  such  return,  shall  reply,  take  issue,  or  demur,  and  such  further 
proceedings,  and  in  such  manner,  shall  be  had  therein  for  the  determina- 
tion thereof,  as  might  have  been  had  if  the  persons  suing  ,such  writ  had 
brought  their  aetion  on  the  case  for  a  false  return ;  and  if  any  issue  shall 
be  joined  on  such  proceeding,  the  persons  suing  out  such  writ  shall  try 
the  same  in  such  place,  as  an  issue  joined  in  such  action  on  the  case 
should  have  been  had;  and  in  case  a  verdict  shall  be  found,  or  judgment 
given  for  them  upon  demurrer,  or  by  nihil  dicit,  or  for  want  of  a  replica- 
tion, or  other  pleading,  they  shall  recover  damages  and  costs,  and  a 
peremptory  writ  of  mandamus  shall  be  granted  without  delay  for  them 
for  whom  judgment  shall  be  given,  as  might  have  been  if  such  return 
had  been  adjudged  insufficient;  and  in  case  judgment  shall  be  given  for 
the  persons  making  such  return,  they  shall  recover  costs,  such  damages 
and  costs  to  be  levied  by  ca.  sa.,  fi.  fa.,  or  elegit. (m)  By  this  statute, 
therefore,  a  power  in  certain  cases  to  plead  to,  or  traverse  the  return,  was 
conferred  upon  the  prosecutor :  so  that  in  those  cases  to  which  such  sta- 
tute referred,  the  proceedings,  by  being  assimilated  to  the  common  law 
furmidse  of  a  personal  action,  became  at  once  transformed  from  their  once 
oppressive,  dilatory,  and  expensive  condition,  to  one  of  great  efficacy, 
despatch,  and  iuexpeusiveness. 

The  cases  which  alone  were  within  the  purview  of  the  above  statute, 
and  as  to  which  it  conferred  the  valuable  privilege  of  traversing,  or  of 
confessing  and  avoiding  the  return,  appears  to  have  been  limited  only  to 
the  particular  cases  of  the  admission  or  restoration  to  certain  municipal 
offices  ;(h)  so  that  to  the  mass  of  the  subjects  of  mandamus  that  statute 
docs  not  extend;  therefore,  the  proceedings  as  to  them  remained  after 
that  statute  as  they  did  before  such  statute,  that  is,  according  to  the 
course  of  the  common  law.(o) 

The  cffiict  which  this  highly  remedial  statute  was  intended  to,  and  did 
produce,  was  evidenced  by  the  immediate  increase  in  the  number  of  appli- 
cations for  the  writ  which  were  made  to  the  Court  of  B.  11.,  not  only  in 
cases  to  which  such  improved  formuloi  was  applicable,  but  also  in  those 
which  were  still  subjected  to  the  dominion  of  the  common  law;  where- 
upon the  Legislature,  with  the  view  of  extending  the  provisions  of  the 
above  stat.  of  9  Ann.  c.  20,  and  of  rendering  the  *practical  ybmw-  r*428"] 
lee  of  the  writ  in  all  cases  uniform,  by  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  3, 
which  recited,  that  the  provisions  of  the  act  9  Ann.  c.  20,  relating  to  the 

(m)  5  N.  &  M.  427,t  n.  [a].  (n)  5  N.  &  M.  427,1  n.  (a) 

(o)  Bull.  N.  P.  204,  cited  iu  5  N.  &  M.  427,}  n.  (a). 


462  TAPPINGS     MANDAMUS, 

writs  of  manckraus  therein  mentioned,  had  been  found  useful  and  conve- 
nient, and  the  same  ought  to  be  extended  to  the  proceeding  on  other  such 
■^rits — enacted :  that  the  several  enactments  contained  in  the  said  statute, 
rehitinf  to  the  returns  to  writs  of  mandamus,  and  the  proceedings  on  such 
returns,  and  to  the  recovery  of  damages  and  costs,  shouhl  be,  and  the 
same  were  thereby  extended  and  made  applicable  to  all  other  writs  of 
mandamus,  and  the  proceedings  thereon. (p)  The  effect  of  which  enact- 
ment is,  that  the  prosecutor  of  a  writ  of  mandamus  in  any  case  may  now 
plead  to,  or  traverse  the  return,  and,  therefore,  speedily  try  his  right  upon 
the  merits,  as  in  a  personal  action,  without  having  recourse  to  the  circui- 
tous and  collateral  proceedings  of  an  action,  or  information  for  a  false 
return ;  and  as  s.  3,  of  the  latter  statute,  provides  :  that  if  any  damages 
shall  be  recovered  against  those  making  the  return,  then  that  they  shall 
not  be  liable  to  be  sued  in  any  other  action  or  suit  for  making  such 
Teturn,(q)  it  is  clear,  that  the  prosecutor  cannot  take  both  courses,  so  that 
the  more  efl&cacious  one  introduced  by  the  statute,  is  that  usually  resorted 
to ;  although  undoubtedly  the  prosecutor  may  at  this  day  avail  himself  of 
his  common  law  proceeding  of  an  action  on  the  case,  or  information  for  a 
fiilse  return, (r)  as  circumstances  may  require. 

.]      What  a  False  Return. — If  a  return  be   true  in   words,  yet 

false  as  to  the  substance  of  the  facts,  an  action  for  a  false  return  will  lie 
against  the  defendant,(.s)  so,  a  return  to  a  traversable  allegation,  if  untrue 
in  fact,  will  support  such  an  action. (0  So,  such  an  action  will  lie  as  well 
for  a  "suppressio  veri,"  as  for  an  "allegatio  falsi."  Thus,  if  there  be 
two  charters,  the  one  giving  a  power  of  amotion  to  select  part  of  a  corpo- 
ration, and  the  other  of  a  later  date,  confirming  the  former  as  to  every 
thing,  but  restoring  the  right  of  amotion  to  the  body  at  large,  and  the 
writ  of  mandamus  state  a  removal  by  the  select  part,  but  the  return  in 
answer  set  forth  the  old  charter  only,  notwithstanding  all  the  facts  in  that 
return  would  be  true,  yet  certainly  an  action  on  the  case  might  be  main- 
Q  tained  for  the  deceit.  So,  that  wherever  in  a  return  there  is  a 
'-*'-'  ^suppression  of  a  truth,  or  the  expression  of  an  untruth,  and  the 
prosecutor  is  injured  thereby,  he  may  maintain  such  action. (i()  Also  if 
a  return  be  improperly  made  by  one  defendant  in  the  name  of  others, 
such  is  a  false  return  in  law.(i') 

As  a  return  must  have  been  adjudged  to  be  sufficient  in  law  before  an 
action  on  the  case,  or  information  for  a  false  return  can  be  successfully 

ip)  See  Stat.  App.     As  to  Ireland,  sec  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  2,  App. 

[q]  See  App.     As  to  Ireland,  see  stat. 

(/•)  R.  V.  Williams,  8  B.  k  C.  GSS.f  S.  C.  3  M.  &  R.  405.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor), 
3  B.  &  Ad.  276.f  R.  v.  Durham  (Mayor),  Burr.  129.  R.  v.  Kelk,  12  A.  k  E.  559.t 
R.  V.  Brancaster  (Churchwardens),  7  A.  &  E.  459.t  S.  C.  2  N.  &  P.  580.  R.  v. 
Payn,  6  A.  &  E.  404.t  S.  C.  1  N.  &  P.  524.t  S.  C.  1  W.  W.  &  D.  99,  142.  S.  C. 
2  Jur.  47. 

(s)  R.  V.  Lyme  Regis,  1  Doug.  159,  per  Buller,  J.  Braithwaite's  case,  1  Doug. 
182,  n.:  1  Vent.  19 ;  6  Rep.  18G,  n.  (G.) ;  Carth.  IVI. 

[t]  R.  V.  Round,  4  A.  &  E.  142.t     S.  C.  5  N.  &  M.  427.t     S.  C.  1  H.  &  W.  546. 

(m)   1  Doug.  156,  157,  supra,  n.  («) ;  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  JIan."  (L.),  n. 

{v)  See  ante,  p.  344,  n.  (b).     See  ante,  341,  342,  343,  344. 


COLLATERAL     PROCEEDINGS.  463 

lbrouglit,(ir)  so,  if  the  return  be  cither  frivolous  or  immaterial,  no  action 
will  lie  upon  it,  but  a  peremptory  mandamus  should  be  moved  for.(x) 

.]     Ill  loliat  Court. — An  action  on  tlie  case  for  a  false  return  may 

be  brought  in  any  Court,  but  in  order  to  obtain  a  peremptory  mandamus, 
such  action  must  be  brought  in  the  Court  of  B.  K.,  because  as  every  pe- 
remptory mandamus  should  recite  the  fact  of  prout  constat  nobis  per  re- 
eordum,  how  can  that  be  done  if  the  proceedings  are,  for  instance,  in  the 
Court  of  C.  B.  ?  as  one  Court  cannot  judicially  take  notice  of  the  proceed- 
ings of  another. (y)  Yet,  in  an  action  for  a  false  return,  judgment  in 
which  was  given  for  the  defendant,  which  upon  a  writ  of  error  in  the  Ex- 
chequer Chamber  affirmed  in  the  House  of  Lords  was  reversed,  the  Court 
of  B.  R.  granted  a  peremptory  mandamus  before  judgment  entered  saying 
it  was  a  mandatory  writ,  and  not  a  judicial  one  founded  upon  the  record. (^•) 

.]  Flaintiffs. — Where  two  or  more  persons  receive  a  joint  dam- 
age or  expense  they  may  join  in  an  action  for  a  false  return.  Thus,  where 
two  churchwardens  had  obtained  a  mandamus  to  the  official  to  be  sworn, 
who  refused  and  made  a  false  return,  it  was  held  they  might  join  in  a  suit 
against  him  for  such  return,  (a)  So,  where  the  mandamus,  and  the  whole 
prosecution  and  charge  thereof  is  joint,  a  joint  action  for  a  false  return 
will  lie,  for  such  action  is  not  brought  for  the  office,  &c.,  but  for  the  un- 
just return. (&)  So,  where  sixteen  people  joined  in  an  application  for  a 
mandamus  to  register  the  certificate  of  a  place  of  ^meeting  for  the  p^,, oat 
religious  worship  of  dissenters,  and  they  all  joined  in  an  action  for  L  "^  J 
a  false  return,  it  was  held,  that  they  might,  for  they  had  all  jointly  sued 
and  prosecuted  the  mandamus  as  their  joint  charge,  which  were  the  dam- 
ages the  plaintiffs  sued  to  recover,  (c) 

If,  however,  the  interest  be  separate,  or  the  damages  be  several  in  such 
cases,  two  or  more  cannot  join  in  such  an  action,  and  the  objection  is  one 
in  arrest  of  judgment. ((?) 

■ .]     Defendants. — If  a  false  return  be  made  by  several,  the  action 

against  them  may  be  either  joint  or  several,  it  being  founded  on  a  tort 

[w)  See  ante,  p.  383,  n.  [d). 

{%)  See  ante,  p.  352,  3T3.  Crawford  v.  Powell,  1  T\'.  Blac.  229.  S.  C.  Burr.  1013. 

[y)  See  ante,  p.  407.  Anon.,  2  Salk.  428.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  125.  S.  C.  5  Mod. 
316.     R.  V.  Green,  Skin.  670.     S.  C.  Holt,  183.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (M.) 

{z)  See  ante,  p.  407  ;  Bull.  N.  P.  198,  202.  Philips  v.  Bury,  2  Salk.  413.  Fal- 
dowe  V.  Ridge,  Cro.  Jac.  206.  S.  C.  Yelv.  74;  2  Vent.  295.  Hicks  v.  Sherburn, 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  287,  (M.) 

[a)  3  Salk.  302,  1.  Weller  v.  Baker,  2  Wils.  414.  "Ward  v.  Brampston,  3  Lev. 
302.  S.  C.  1  Danvers,  6,  pi.  10.  S.  C.  2  Wms.  Saund.  116,  a,  b,  n.  3.  Anon.,  2 
Salk.  428.  S.  C.  Raym.  125.  S.  C.  5  Mod.  316.  Vide  12  Mod.  349,  371.  Bac. 
Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  B. 

(6)  3  Lev.  362,  supra,  n.  (a).  Linley  Chapel  (Inhabs.)  t.  Chester  (Ep.),  cited  in 
3  Lev.  363. 

(c)  Green  v.  Pope,  1  Ld.  Raym.  125.  Ward  \.  Brampston,  3  Lev.  362.  See  Fall 
V.  Reg.  1  Q.  B.  657,  658.1  S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  808.  S.  C.  13  L.  J.,  N.  S.  187,  Q.  B. 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (L.),  n. 

[d)  See  supra,  n.  (c).  Butler  v.  Rews,  12  Mod.  349.  R.  v.  Andover  (Town),  12  Mod. 
332.     S.  C.  2  Salk.  433.     S.  C.  Holt,  441.     Butler  v.  ,  12  Mod.  371. 


464  tapping's    m  a  n  d  a  iM  u  s. 

and  a  species  of  the  action  on  the  ca8e.(r)  Thus,  if  a  return  be  made  by 
a  mayor  and  aUlcrmen,  the  action  may  be  brought  cither  against  all  or 
against  the  mayor  only,  but  if  in  the  latter  case  it  appear  upon  the  evi- 
dence that  he  voted  agaiust  the  return,  but  was  overruled  by  the  majority, 
the  plaintiflF  will  be  nonsuited. (/) 

An  action  on  the  case  for  a  false  return  to  a  writ  of  mandamus  lies 
against  a  corporation,  whether  or  not  the  return  be  made  by  such  corpo- 
ration under  its  corporate  seal,(^)  or  although  it  be  neither  signed  nor 
sealed. (/t)  It  may  also  be  brought  against  the  whole  corporation  by  the 
name  of  the  writ,(/)  or  against  any  particular  member  of  it(y)  in  his  per- 
sonal narae.(Z:) 

The  action  on  the  case  for  a  false  return  to  the  mandamus,  is  as  to  its 
pleadings,  &c.,  essentially  a  civil  action,  and  is  therefore  governed  by  all 
the  rules  of  pleading  and  practice  applicable  to  such  actions. 
• .]  Declaration. — In  a  declaration  for  a  false  return  to  a  manda- 
mus, it  need  not  be  alleged  that  the  defendants  ought  to  have  obeyed  it, 
for  by  making  a  return  and  alleging  a  reason  why  they  could  not  obey  the 
writ,  that  is  admitted. (0  It  should  however,  be  positively  shewn  upon 
*the  face  of  the  declaration,  that  the  return  has  been  adjudged  to 
L         -I  be  and  is  sufficient  in  law.(??0 

An  action  for  a  false  return  to  a  writ  of  mandamus  is  local,  and  must 
be  laid  at  the  election  of  the  plaintiff,  in  the  county  where  the  return  was 
made,  or  in  the  county  where  the  Court  sits,  in  which  it  is  recorded  for 
such  a  return  consists  of  two  falsities,  viz.,  that  of  the  fact  falsely  re- 
turned, and  the  falsity  of  returning  it  on  record. (??)  The  Court  will  not 
chano-e  the  venue  on  the  application  of  the  defendant  without  the  plain- 
tiif's  consent.(o) 

(e)  See  Chit,  on  PI.,  "Parties  to  Actions."     Rich  v.  Pilkington,  Carth.  1*71. 

(/)  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (L.).     R.  v.  Chapman,  6  Mod.  152. 

ig)  Argent  v.  St.  Paul's  (Dean),  3  Doug.  238. 

(h)  Mayor  of  Thetford's  case,  1  Salk.  191,  4.     Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (L.) 

(?")  See  ante,  p.  342,  344.     R.  v.  Halse,  1  Keb.  20 ;  Ld.  Raym.  564,  per  Holt,  C.  J. 

(  ;■)  R  V.  Chapman,  6  Mod.  152,  and  cases  there  cited.     S.  C.  Holt,  443. 

[k]  R.  V.  Rippon  (Corp.),  1  Com.  86,  c.  55.  S.  C.  Ld.  Raym.  564.  S.  C.  2  Salk. 
433.  Vaughan  v.  Lewis,  Carth.  227,  (where  see  form  of  declaration).  Rich  v.  Pilk- 
ington,  Carth.  171.  Argent  v.  St.  Paul's  (Dean),  3  Doug.  238.  Enfield  v.  Hills,  Sir 
T.  Jones,  116.    S.  C.  2  Lev.  236.     S.  C.  3  Keb.  859. 

{I)  Mayor  of  Norwich's  case,  12  Mod.  322.  The  following  cases  contain  forms  of 
declaration  in  an  action  for  a  false  return.  To  admit  a  sexton,  2  B.  &  C.  313.f 
S.  C.  3  D.  &  R.  549. f  For  not  accepting- a  surrender,  4  M.  &  S.  486.  For  not  ap- 
pointing a  sexton,  10  East,  259.  For  not  calling  a  parish  meeting  to  license  a 
curate, "e  D.  &  R.  5l7.f  To  admit  an  alderman,  3  P.  &  D.  505.  So  swear  in 
churchwardens,  2  Lut.  1012,  which  declaration  was  drawn  by  Pollexfcn  and  Holt, 
ore  C.  J.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Return."  (F.) 

(»i)  See  ante,  p.  429.  R.  v.  London  (Mayor),  3  B.  &  Ad.  276,  279.t  R.  v.  Lon- 
don (Mayor),  5  B.  &  Ad.  233.t  Enfield  v.  Hills,  2  Lev.  236,  238.  S.  C.  Sir  T.  Jones, 
116.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "Man."  D.  6. 

(n)  See  ante,  p.  388,  n.  (/c).  Anon.,  12  Mod.  515.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  669.  Lord  t. 
Francis,  12  Mod.  408.  S.  C.  Holt,  170.  Russell  v.  Succlin,  1  Sid.  218.  R.  v. 
Newcastle-upon-Tyne  (Mayor),  1  East,  115. 

(o)  See  12  Mod.  515,  supra,  n.  (n). 


COLLATERAL  PROCEEDINGS.  465 

.]     Evidence,  &c. — Tn  an  action  for  a  false  return,  the  defendant 

may  have  inspection,  &c.,  and  copy  of  charters,  &c.(p) 

The  evidence  in  each  case  must  necessarily  vary  with  the  facts  of  each 
return.  The  following  decisions  on  the  sufficiency  of  evidence  in  certain 
cases  appear  in  the  books.  In  an  action  for  a  false  return  of  "non  fuit 
electus,"  the  plaintiff  need  not  prove  having  taken  the  Sacrament  within 
the  year  before  election,  if  the  trial  be  above  six  months  after  the  election, 
and  there  have  not  been  any  prosecution,((/)  and  upon  such  an  issue  as  to 
a  corporate  officer,  Lord  Holt  has  said,  if  one  be  irregularly  chosen  at 
first,  and  afterwards  his  title  be  recognised  and  his  name  entered  in  the 
corporation  books,  or  regularly  chosen  into  a  superior  dignity,  such  should 
be  taken  to  be  such  evidence  of  a  good  election  as  ought  not  to  be  con- 
troverted, (r) 

That  which  is  only  a  circumstance  and  not  the  point  of  truth,  or  falsity 
of  the  return  need  not  be  proved,  as  that  the  plaintiff  after  he  was  elected, 
presented  himself  to  be  sworn. (s) 

It  should  be  proved  that  the  return  was  made  by  the  defend- 
ant. (;')  *The  delivery  of  the  writ  need  not  however  be  proved. («)  L  J 
But  as  in  the  case  of  a  corporation,  the  return  need  neither  be  signed  nor 
sealed,  so,  it  will  be  sufficient  evidence  against  the  mayor  in  an  action  for 
a  false  return,  that  the  mandamus  was  delivered  to  him,  and  such  a  return 
has  been  made,  unless  he  prove  it  is  not  his  return. (?;)  The  Court  allows 
the  propriety  of  issuing  the  writ  of  mandamus  to  be  questioned,  (w?)  but  it 
seems  the  validity  of  the  writ  may  be  impugned,  if  the  action  be  brought 
in  B.  R.(.r) 

.]     Verdict. — If  the  action  be  brought  in  the  Court  of  B.  R.,  and 

a  verdict  be  found  for  the  plaintiff  in  such  action,  the  return  thereby 
proved  to  be  false  is  no  return  in  contemplation  of  law,(y)  and  a  peremp- 
tory mandamus  will  be  awarded, (^)  upon  motion  on  reading  an  office  copy 
of  the  record  in  the  action  or  information,  (a) 

{p)  Anon.,  2  Salk.  430.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  2.  But  see  ante,  p.  3T8,  379, 
n.  (?w). 

[q)  Crawford  V.Powell,  Burr.  1013.  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6.  As  to  evidence 
on  non  fuit  electus,  see  Ld.  Raym.  135-4  ;  Stra.  1145.  S.  C.  T  Mod.  365  ;  Bull.  N.  P. 
205,  206. 

(r)  Lord  v.  Francis,  12  Mod.  408.  S.  C.  Holt,  ITO.  Piper  v.  Dennis,  12  Mod. 
253.     R.  V.  Monmouth  (Mayor),  4  B.  &  A.  496.f 

■(«)  Batson  v.  Sayer,  Stra.  728.     Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6. 

{t)  Vaughan  v.  Lewis,  Carth.  229.  R.  v.  Chalice,  Ld.  Raym.  848  ;  Bull.  N.  P. 
205.     See  ante,  p.  341,  342,  343,  344,  430,  n.  (/),  and  post,  p.  434,  n.  [r). 

[u)  See  post,  p.  434.     R.  v.  Chapman,  6  Mod.  152.     S.  C.  Holt,  443. 

\v)  See  ante,  p.  363.  R.  v.  Exeter  (Mayor),  Ld.  Ray.  223.  Bull.  N.  P.  209. 
Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "  Man."  (L.) 

[iv)  R.  V.  Clarke,  2  East,  83.  Green  v.  Pope,  Ld.  Ray.  126.  Bac.  Abr.  tit. 
'=  Man."  (L.) 

(.X-)  See  ante,  p.  374,  n.  (o).  Green  v.  Pope,  Ld.  Ray.  125,  126.  Clarke  v.  Lei- 
cestershire Canal,  6  Q.  B.  600. f 

{y)  R.  V.  Heathcote,  10  Mod.  57.  R.  v.  Ely  (Ep.),  2  T.  R.  319.  Bowles  v.  Neale, 
7  C.  &  P.  262.f 

[z)  See  ante,  p.  402,  n.  (/).  R.  v.  Green,  Skin.  670.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  428.  S.  C. 
Ld.  Raym.  125.     S.  C.  5  Mod.  316 ;  11  Co.  99  b ;  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  Man."  D.  6. 

(a)  Gude's  Cr.  Pr.  188. 

June,  1852.— 30 


466  tapping's    mandamus. 

The  Court,  if  necessary,  will  refer  certain  points  to  arbitration. (/;) 
.]     Error.— rx\.  writ  of  error  lies  in  an  action  for  a  false  return  to  a 

manilamus,  and  operates  as  a  supersedeas  to  a  peremptory  mandamus. (c) 

It  is  the  same  as  in  a  personal  action. 

Costs.]     The  rules  as  to  costs  arc  the  same  as  in  personal  actions. (c?) 

Information  for  a  False  Return.]  Whc7i  it  lies. — If  the  writ  of 
mandamus  have  not  been  brought  in  respect  of  a  private  right,  but  public 
government  is  concerned,  so  that  an  action  for  a  false  return  cannot  be 
maintained,  and  the  case  be  not  within  the  stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  so  that  the 
return  maybe  traversed,  and  if  proper,  a  peremptory  mandamus  awarded, 
and  the  matter  be  one  in  which  no  one  is  particularly  interested,  the 
Court  will,  on  application,  grant  a  criminal  information  against  all  the 
parties  who  made  such  false  return,  in  order  that  the  disputed  facts  may 
r*/iooT  ^^  tried. (c)  Thus,  such  an  information  will  be  *granted  against  a 
«-  ^  -'  mayor,  for  making  a  return  against  the  votes  of  the  majority ;(/) 
and  notwithstanding  the  return  may  be  under  the  common  seal,  yet  such 
an  information  may  be  moved  against  the  particular  persons  who  pro- 
cured it.(.'/) 

A  criminal  information  will  not,  however,  lie  against  justices,  for  hav- 
ing made  a  false  return  to  a  raandamu^i,  unless  such  return  be  corruptly 
and  wilfully  false  ;(A)  nor  where  the  return  depends  upon  a  matter  of 
doubtful  law.(/')  But  where  justices  had  made  a  false  return  to  a  man- 
damus, to  appoint  overseers  for  a  township,  and  the  Court  had  thereupon 
granted  a  rule  nisi  for  a  criminal  information,  and  on  shewing  cause 
against  that  rule,  contradictory  facts  were  disclosed  which  were  directed  to 
be  tried  by  an  issue,  and  after  an  issue  had  been  prepared  and  delivered,  the 
justices  abandoned  the  issue,  and  obtained  a  Judge's  order  for  staying 
proceedings,  without  prejudice  to  the  question  of  costs,  the  Court  ordered 
the  justices  to  pay  the  prosecutor  the  costs  of  preparing  and  delivering 
the  issue. (y)     So  such  an  information  will  bo  granted  against  justices  of 

{b)  Sec  ante,  p.  412.    Dr.  Widdrinj^ton's  case,  Rajm.  68.    S.  C.  1  Sid.  Tl. 

(c)  RudinjT  v.  Newel,  Stni.  98J.     See  ante,  p.  40(J,  and  tit. ''  Error,"  397 

(d)  See  Chit.  I'rac.  tit.  '•  Ci.st.s." 


(e)  R.  V.  Spotland  (Overseers),  C.v?.  t.  ILird.  l8-t.  Uac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (L.) 
iirixeons'  ("ompany's  (Case).  1  Salk.  ;!74  ;  lid.  Raym.  584.  U.  v.  I'ettiward,  I'.urr. 
4.")2,  ;{.  11.  V.  Lancashire  (.J.),  1  1).  &  R.  48j.t  R.  v.  Noltinjjhani  (.Mayorj,  liull. 
[.  1'.  1!)0,  2(13.  Anon.,  Loin.  18.5.  R.  v.  Chapman,  (5  Mod.  152.  S.  C.'lh.ll,  442. 
all  V.  R.  I  Q.  B.  G44,  G45.t     S.  C.  2  G.  &  D.  808.     Com.  Di?.  tit.  "  Man."  1).  G. 


8i; 

24. 

N.  l\  1!)0, 

Fall  V.  R.  ,      

(/)  See  ante,  p.  341,  342,  .^43.  Tiie  case  of  Abingdon  Town.  Carth.  500.  S.  C. 
12  Mod.  308.  S.  C.  1  Salk.  431.  S.  C.  2  Salk.  GO'J.  S.  C.  Hull,  440.  S.  C.  Ld. 
Raym.  5r.O. 

;  </)  Sec  ante.  p.  430.  The  case  of  the  Surgeons'  Companv,  Com.  Dig.  tit.  "  .Man." 
(D.  (i). 

(h)  R.  V.  Lancash.  (J.),  1  D.  &  R.  48r..t  and  n.  (a).  R.  v.  Spotland,  Cas.  t. 
Card.  184.     S.  C.  1  []arn.  137.     See  R.  v.  I'ettiward,  Riirr.  2452. 

(i)  R.  V.  I'ettiward,  Burr.  2452.  [J)  Kec  I  D.  &,  R.  485, f  supra,  n.  (/<)■ 


COLLATERAL     rROCEEDINGS.  467 

the  peace  for  disobedience  to  a  peremptory  mandamus  ;(/i)  or  for  making 
a  shuffling  and  evasive  return. (/) 

.]     Motion. — The  rule  for  a  criminal  information  is   obtained  by 

application  to  the  Court,  on  motion,  supported  by  affidavits  of  the 
facts ;(/»)  the  Court  will  easily  grant  it,  but  the  rule  is,  in  the  first 
instance,  a  rule  to  shew  cause  only;(/i)  it  cannot,  however,  be  moved  for, 
until  the  return  shall  have  been  filed  and  allowed. (o) 

.]  Venue. — The  Court  will  not  change  the  venue  in  an  informa- 
tion for  a  false  return  to  a  mandamus, (j>)  and  has  distinguished  the  case 
of  an  action  for  a  false  return,  from  an  information  in  this  respect. ((^) 

* .]     Evidence. — A  copy  from  the  Crown  Office  of  the  writ  [-:t:4Q4-i 

and  return  thereto  is  sufficient  evidence  against  the  defendant  on 
the  trial  of  the  information  •,{r)  the  delivery  of  the  writ  need  not  be  prov- 
ed ;(/•)  nor  will  the  Court  sufier  the  propriety  of  issuing  the  writ  of  man- 
damus to  be  questioned. (,s) 

.]      Verdict. — After  the  return  bas  been  falsified  by  a  verdict  for 

the  prosecutor,  a  peremptory  mandamus  will  lie  as  of  right. (/)  But  the 
motion  for  such  writ  cannot  be  made  till  four  days  after  the  return  of  the 
postca,  because  the  defendant  has  so  long  to  move  in  arrest  of  judg- 
ment.(«)  As  no  damages  are  recoverable  by  tbe  prosecutor,  so  the  Court 
imposes  a  fine(y)  upon  the  defendants,  if  unsuccessful. 

(A-)  R.  V.  Corbett,  Sayer,  2G7,  where  see  the  special  terms  upon  which  the  rule 
was  discharged. 

{I)  See  -ute,  p.  352,  n.  {u). 

(m)  See  ante,  p.  293,  29(j.  Anon.,  Lofft.  185.  The  case  of  thp  Surgeons'  Com- 
pany, 1  Salk.  373,  16.  R.  v.  Peltivvard,  Burr.  2454.  For  the  full  practice  of  a  cri- 
minal information,  see  Corn.  Cr.  Pr.  p.  1C8. 

{n)  Anon.,  1  Barn.  327.  Surgeons'  Company's  (Case),  1  Salk.  374.  R.  y.  Cor- 
bett, Sayer,  207. 

(o)  See  ante,  p.  383.  Bull.  N.  P.  199.  Bac.  Abr.  tit.  "Man."  (L.),  n.  R.  v. 
Lanca.^tcr,  1  D.  &  R.  485.     Supra,  n.  (Ji). 

{p)  R..  V.  Barton,  Say.  146. 

{q)   II.  V.  Oxford  (Mayor),  Say.  I'IG. 

(r)  See  ante,  p.  432.  R.  v.  Chapman,  6  Mod.  112.  S.  C.  IIoU,  442,  443.  See 
tit.  ''False  Return"  (Evidence). 

(s)  11.  V.  Clarke,  2  East,  82.     Green  v.  Pope,  Ld.  Ray.  126. 

(/)  Sec  ante,  p.  402,  n.  (  /").     Buckley  v.  Palmer,  2  Salk.  430,  431. 

\u)  See  ante,  p.  40G,  n.  (d).  Case  of  the  City  of  Exeter,  P.  12  Wm.  3,  B.  R., 
and  see  1  Salk.  374.     Supra,  n.  (/(). 

(i>)  1  Salk.  374,  cited  in  5  Bac.  Abr.  28G,  tit.  "Man."  (L.).  "Zth  edit.  Ca.  temp. 
Hard.  184.     Bull.  N.  P.  203;    1  (J.  &  1).  121,  123.     S.  C.  1  Q.  B.  G44;+   Burr.  2452; 

1  D.  &  U.  485, f  supra.    Buckley  v.  Palmer,  2  Salk.  431.    R.  v.  Abingdon  (.Mayor), 

2  Salk.  431,  432.     S.  C.  Carth.'500.     S.  C.  Ld.  Uaym.  559. 


APPENDIX 

TO 

THE    LAAV  AND  PRACTICE 


c<> 


rcrugaiiDc 

WRIT  OF  MANDAMUS. 


FORM  A. 

A  Letter  from  King  Hen.  IV.  to  the  certain  Sheriffs  to  raise  men  for  the 
defence  of  the  kingdom  against  the  invasion  of  Oiceyn  Glendourdy. 
Bated  Thursday,  2Qth  May,  2  Een.  IV.  1401. 

Treschier  t  foial,  Nous  vous  salvons  en  vous  signifiant  que  yce  Jeudy  le 
xsvj.  jour  cle  May  a  nous  estoit  apportee  certeine  nouvelle  a  nrc  cLastel 
de  Walyngford  que  Oweyn  Grlendourdy  t  autres  noz  rebelx  de  nre  pays  de 
Gales  se  sont  levez  t  de  nouvelle  assemblez  en  les  marches  de  Kermerdyn 
aiant  en  purpos  dentrer  en  nre  roiaume  ove  fort  main  pour  destruir  nre 
lalige  Angloys  t  tous  noz  foialx  lieges  t  soubgiez  qui  Dieux  defende  et 
pour  resister  a  la  malice  de  noz  ditz  rebelx  nous  suymes  ordennez  a  de- 
partir  domain  de  nre  dit  chastel  et  de  tener  nre  cbemyn  vers  les  parties  de 
Wircestre.  Par  quoi  nous  mandons  que  ovec  les  chivalers  escuiers  gentz 
darmes  t  le  pluis  suffisantz  arclirs  de  nre  countee  dont  vous  estes  nre  vis- 
counte  vous  soiez  devers  nous  [par  la  ou  nous  soions]  en  tout  hast  possible 
sauns  defaute  sur  la  foye  t  ligeance  que  vous  nous  devez  t  come  vous  de- 
sirez  la  salvacioun  de  nous  t  do  nre  roialme.  Donne  soubz  nre  signet  a 
lavandit  nre  chastel  le  Jeudy  suisdit.fn) 

(fl)  Bibl.  Cotton.  Cleopatra,  f.  Ill,  f.  115;  2  Nicolas  Proc.  Priv.  Coun.  54. 

The  above  is  a  specimen  of  a  "  Letter  Missive, "  -which  shews  the  condition  of 
the  writ  of  mandamus  some  centuries  before  it  became  a  judicial  writ.  See  ante, 
p.  3,  n.  {h). 


APPENDIX.  469 

*FORM  K  [*436] 

Priv)/  Seal  commanding  the  Treasurer  and  CJiamherlains  of  the  Exchequer 
to  deliver  to  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln  certain  articles  of  plate,  &c.  (L  : 
3;  18,1.  No.  2.)  (a) 

Edward  p  la  g»ce  de  Dieu  Roi  d  Engletre  Seign'  d  Irlaunde  t  Dues  d 
Aquitaine  as  Tresorier  t  Chambreleins  de  nre  Esclieqicr  saluz.  Nous  vous 
mandoms  q  la  vessele  d  argent  t  les  jueuxl  ou'-able  Piere  en  Dieu  lEvesq, 
de  Nicole  q  feurent  p^s  de  lui,  en  temps  nre  ts  cli  Seign-- 1  Piere  t  livez  a 
nre  ch  clerc  Thomas  de  Usflete  p  les  meins  Nichol  de  Falle  t  puis  sont 
devenuz  en  vre  garde,  et  auxint  les  tentes  t  pavilions  le  dit  Evesq,  q  vo' 
avez  en  garde  faeez  liver  a  mesme  1  Evesq,  ou  a  son  attournez  p  endenture. 
Don  souz  nre  pVe  seal  a  Estaunford  le  xxvi.  jour  d  Averil  1  an  de  nre 
regne  pimer. 


FORM  C. 


6  ffen.    VIII. — Privy  Seal  directing  the  delivery  to  the  Amlassadors 
(about  to  repair  to  France')  of  the  treaty  of  Amhoisc,  1492.     (Me- 


moranda,  p.  149.  (F) 


Henry  by  the  grace  of  God  King  of  England  and  of  Fraunce  and  Lorde 
of  Ireland.  To  the  Tresourer  and  Chamberlains  of  our  Eschequier  greet- 
ing, Where  as  a  certain  bonde  and  writing  obligatory  heretofore  made  by 
King  Charles  of  Fraunce  undre  his  grete  seal  and  signe  manuell  unto  the 
late  King  our  Fader  whome  God  pdone  bering  date  at  Ambasie  the  xiii'^ 
day  of  Decembr  the  yere  of  our  Lorde  God  m'.CCCCLXXXXII  remaigneth 
in  the  Tresourye  of  our  said  Eschequier.  We  for  divse  consideracons  us 
and  Or  Counsaill  moeving  well  and  camounde  you  to  deliv  the  said  bond 
and  writing  unto  or  ryght  trusty  cousyn  th  Erie  of  Worcestre  o--  Cham- 
blain  the  Prior  of  Seint  Johns  Jertm  w'in  this  or  reame  and  Docto>-  West 
o--  Counsaillors  which  we  nowe  sende  in  o'  ambassade  unto  o^  derest  brother 
and  cousyn  Kyng  Loys  of  Fraunce,  And  these  o'  Ires  shal  be  yo''  suffi- 
cient warrant  and  discharge  in  that  behalf.  Yeven  undre  Or  prive  scale 
at  o--  manr  of  Gylforth  the  xxixf^  day  of  August  the  vi'"  yere  of  our  reigne. 

PURDE. 

(a)  See  Palgrave's  Anc.  Exr.,  Kal.  &  Inv.,  vol.  2,  p.  143.  The  above  "Privy 
Seal"  shews  an  ancient  condition  of  the  writ  of  mandamus. 

[b)  See  Palgrave's  Anc.  Exr.,  Kal.  &c.,  vol.  2,  p.  402.  See  preceding  form  of 
"  Privy  Seal,"  n.  {a). 


470  tapping's    mandamus. 


[*437]  *FORM  D. 

3  Ed.  III. — A  writ  commanding  the  Treasurer  and  CTinmhnrlaina  of 
the  Exchequer  to  deliver  to  John  de  Stonore,  Chief  Ju^liee  of  the 
Bench,  and  successor  of  WiUielmus  de  Ilerle,  late  Chief  Justice  thereof ^ 
the  Rolls  ichich  had  been  hrowjht  in  hy  the  latter.  (L:  3;  18,  2.  No. 
1).  (a) 

Edwardus  Dei  gra  Rex  Angt  Ds  Ilibnn  t  Dux  Aquit  Thcs  t  Camar 
Buis:  saltm.  Cum  constituim'  dilcm  t  fidelem  nrm  Johem  de  Stonore 
Capitalcm  Justic  nrm  de  Banco  ad  plita  in  eodcm  Banco  una  cum  alii? 
fidelibz  nris  scdm  legem  t  consuctudinc  regni  nri  tcnend  qamdiu  nob  pla- 
cuit  t  mandavim'  dilco  t  fideli  nro  Willo  de  Ilerle  qd  rotulos  t  omia  alia 
ofl&ciu  illud  tangencia  que  in  custodia  sua  existunt,  ad  Scacm  nrm  sine 
dilone  venire  fac  vob  p  indenturam  inde  conficiend,  liband.  Voh  man- 
dam'  qd  rotulos  t  omia  alia  dcm  officiu  tangencia  que  pfatus  >yills  vob  ut 
pmittitr  libabit,  pfato  Johi  p  indenturam  modo  debito  inde  conficiend, 
libetis  ad  faciend  ea  que  ad  officiQ  suu  ptinet  in  hac  parte.  T.  me  ipo 
apud  Grlouc  tcio  die  Septembr  anno  r.  n.  tcio. 

p.  ipm  Regem  t  cons. 


A  precedent  of  a  writ  of  restitution  [ante,  p.  3,  n.  (mj]  heforc  Forte^cue, 
Chief  Justice  of  the  Queen's  Bench  in  the  time  of  Hen.  VI.,  cited  in 
Middkton's  Case,  E.  T.,  16  Eliz.,  2  Dyer,  332  h.  See  Officina 
Brevium,  p.  189.(6) 

Rex  maiori(Z')  ciuitatis  London  salutem.  Cum  Richardus  Anable  dc 
London  pewterer  juxta  legem  et  cons  regni  nostri  Anglian,  temporibus 
nostris  et  progenitorum  nostrorum  Rogum  xYnglioe  hactenus  pro  quibus- 
cunque  ligeis  nostris  et  progenitorum  nostrorum  proedictorum  visitat  et 
approbat  in  curia  nostra  coram  nobis  per  breue  implacitaverit  Thorn  Faw- 
coner  de  London  mercer,  nuper  Eschaetorem  ciuitatis  nostrse  praedictae,  de 
r*4.^81  fl^ibusdam  transg  in  *breui  illo  specificat  eidem  Rich.  (vt.  dicitur) 
*-  illatis,  tamen  ex  parte  praedicti  Richardi  in  curia  nostra  prscdicta 

coram  nobis  grauem  querelam  recepimus,  continent  quod  licet  idem  Ri- 
chardus a  diu  in  libertatem  et  franches  infra  eandem  ciuitatem  habere  et 
gaudere,  sicut  cjeteri  conclues,  status  et  codicionis  sufs  eiusdem  ciuitatis, 
habere  et  gaudere  consueuerunt,  vt  unus  de  conciuibus  eiusdem  ciuitatis, 

(a)  See  Palgrave's  Anc.  Extr.,  Kal.  &c.,  vol.  2,  p.  148.  This  form  exhibits  the 
present  writ  of  mandamus  in  its  condition  of"  Parliamentary  Writ."  Sec  ante,  p. 
3,  n.  (I)  251,  n.  {z),  2G9,  n.  (iv). 

(b)  In  the  report  of  Middlcton's  case,  2  D^'er,  332  b,  it  is  stated  that  a  similar 
writ  to  tlie  one  in  Anable's  case  was  made  in  the  same  Term,  but  that  it  was  in  a 
better  form,  inasmuch  as  it  was  dircctcil  to  the  mayor,  alderman,  and  sherifl's  of 
London,  with  words  to  restore  the  prosecutor  to  his  former  liberties,  &c. 


APPENDIX.  471 

a  tempore  quo  adraissus  fuit  quousque  ipse  qucrelam  suam  prooclictam  de 
transgrcs  precdict  versus  proof  Thomam  in  curia  nostra  coram  nobis  mouis- 
sct,  et  prof  fuiset  pacificc  ct  quicte  gaudcbat  et  habere  solcbat.  Vos 
occasion  raotionis  querela)  procdictic,  versus  prfcdictum  Thomam,  et  pro- 
secutioncm  eiusdem  alibi  quam  coram  vobis  infra  ciuitatem  nostram  prae- 
dictam  ipsum  Richardum  libertates  suas  infra  ciuitatem  nostram  pdietam 
amittere  causare  intcnditis,  et  ostea  et  fenestras  ipsius  Ilichardi  mansioni? 
suae  infra  eandcm  ciuitatem  claudi  et  serari  fccistis,  et  plura  alia  graua- 
mina  sibi  intollerabilia,  imposuistis  et  imponi  fecist,  quo  minus  idem 
Richardus  iusticiam  suam  dicta3  querelte  trasgressionis  prsedictae,  in  dicta 
curia  nostra  coram  nobis  libere,  sicut  ligeus  noster  consequi  possit,  in 
nostri  contemptCi  et  ipsius  Ilichardi  dapnum  grauissinium,  et  in  hac  parte 
pernitiosum  exemplu  ac  regalia)  corona;  nostrae  et  dignitatis  niaximam 
derogationem  :  preeipue  cum  prgerogatiua  regalias  nostrae,  qua  nos  et  pro- 
genitores  nostri  supradicti  de  iure  vsi  fuerimus  sicuti  dignitati  nostrae 
regia)  copetet  vt  ius  coronae  nostra;  persona;  nostra;  annexum,  quod  qui- 
libet  ligeus  noster  qui  huiusmodi  ius  suum  cora  nobis  prosequi  volucrit, 
et  illud  ibid  liber  cosequi  posjit,  absque  aliqua  indignac,  vexatione,  graua- 
mine,  seu  impedimento  ea  occasione  sibi  alibi  per  aliquem  imponend. 
Vobis  igitur  mandamus  firmiter  iniungen,  quod  si  ostia  aliqua,  aut 
fenestras  mansionis  ipsius  Richardi  ea  occasione  claudi  feceritis,  ea  sine 
dilatione  aperiri  faciatis,  ipsumque  Richardum  seu  conquerent  pracdictos, 
ac  eorum  aliquem  occasionibus  praedictis  non  molestantes  in  aliquo  seu 
grauantes,  ET  si  quid  in  contrarium  feceritis,  id  sine  dilatione  eidem 
Richardo  rclaxetiset  emendari  faciatis.     Teste  J.  Fortescue.(a,) 

(a)  Many  Judges  have,  'when  speaking  of  the  antiquity  of  the  writ  of  mandamus, 
erroneously  referred  to  Bagg's  case,  11  Rep.  93  b,  temp.  13  Jac.  1,  as  beingthe  first 
writ  that  was  granted  for  a  municipal  ofhee.  The  abore  case,  temp.  Hen.  6,  and 
also  Middleton's  case,  prove  the  falsity  of  the  assertion.    See  ante,  p.  2,  n.  (/). 


APPENDIX 

OF    THE 

ENGLISH  STATUTES 

RELATING    TO    THE 

HIGH  PREROGATIVE  WRIT  OF  MANDAMUS. 


[*439]  *9  Anne,  c.  20. 

An  Act  for  rendering  the  Proceedings  %ipon  Writs  of  Mandamus,  and 
Informations  in  the  nature  of  a  Quo  Warranto,  more  speedy  and 
effectual;  and  for  the  more  easy  trying  and  determining  the  Eights  of 
Offices  and  Franchises  in  Corporations  and  Boronghs.{a) 

Whereas  divers  persons  have  of  late  illegally  intruded  themselves 
into,  and  have  taken  upon  themselves  to  execute  the  offices  of  mayors, 
bailiffs,  portreeves  and  other  offices  within  cities,  towns  corporate,  bo- 
roughs and  places,  within  that  part  of  Great  Britain  called  England  and 
Wales ;  and  where  such  offices  were  annual  offices,  it  hath  been  found 
very  difficult,  if  not  impracticable,  by  the  laws  now  in  being,  to  bring  to 
a  trial  and  determination  the  right  of  such  persons  to  the  said  offices 
within  the  compass  of  the  year;  and  where  such  offices  were  not  annual 
offices,  it  hath  been  found  difficult  to  try  and  determine  the  right  of  such 
persons  to  such  offices,  before  they  have  done  divers  acts  in  their  said 
offices  prejudicial  to  the  peace,  order,  and  good  government  within  such 
cities,  towns  corporate,  boroughs  and  places,  wherein  they  have  respec- 
tively acted. 

And  whereas  divers  persons  who  had  a  right  to  such  offices,  or  to  be 
burgesses  or  freemen  of  such  cities,  towns  corporate,  boroughs  or  places, 
have  either  been  illegally  turned  out  of  the  same,  or  have  been  refused 
to  be  admitted  thereto,  having  in  many  of  the  said  cases  no  other  remedy 
to  procure  themselves  to  be  respectively  admitted  or  restored  to  their  said 
offices  or  franchises  of  being  burgesses  or  freemen,  than  by  writs  of  man- 

[a]  Only  so  much  of  this  statute  is  given  as  appertains  to  the  subject  "  manda- 
mus." This  statute  is  stated  by  Foster,  J.,  in  R.  v.  Williams,  Burr.  402,  408,  to 
have  been  drawn  by  Powell,  J.,  with  great  care  and  attention,  its  object  being  to 
provide  for  speeding  prosecutions,  and  to  quicken  the  removal  of  the  usurpers  of 
mufciicipal  offices.     R.  v.  Heathcote,  10  Mod.  54,  per  Eyre,  J.     S.  C.  Fort.  290. 


APPENDIX.  473 

damns,  iho  proceedings  on  which  are  very  dilatory  and  expensive,  where- 
by  great  mischiefs  have  already  ensued,  and  more  are  likely  to  ensue,  if 
not  timely  prevented  :  for  remedy  "whereof, 

It  is  enacted,  That  from  and  after  the  first  day  of  Trinity  Term,  in 
the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  eleven,  where  any 
writ  of  mandamus  shall  issue  out  of  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  the 
Courts  of  Sessions  of  Counties  Palatine,  or  out  of  any  the  Courts  of 
G-rand  Sessions  in  Wales,  in  any  of  the  cases  aforesaid,  such  person  or 
persons  who  by  the  laws  of  this  realm  are  required  to  make  a  return  to 
such  writ  of  mandamus,  shall  make  his  or  their  return  to  the  first  writ 
of  mandamus. {h) 

2.  That  from  and  after  the  said  first  day  of  Trinity  Term,  as  often  as 
in  any  of  the  cases  aforesaid  any  writ  of  mandamus  shall  issue  out  of 
any  of  the  said  Courts,  and  a  return  shall  be  made  thereunto,  it  shall  and 
may  be  lawful  to  and  for  the  person  or  persons  suing  or  prosecuting  such 
writ  of  mandamus,  to  plead  to,  or  traverse  all  or  any  the  material  facts 
contained  within  the  said  return :  to  which  the  ^person  or  persons  r*  i  ^n-i 
making  such  return  shall  reply,  take  issue,  or  demur;  and  such 
further  proceedings,  and  in  such  manner  shall  be  had  therein,  for  the 
determination  thereof,  as  might  have  been  had  if  the  person  or  persons 
suing  such  writ  had  brought  his  or  their  action  on  the  case  for  a  false 
return;  and  if  any  issue  shall  be  joined  on  such  proceedings,  the  person 
or  persons  suing  such  writ  shall  and  may  try  the  same  in  such  place  as 
an  issue  joined  in  such  action  on  the  case  should  or  might  have  been 
tried ;  and  in  case  a  verdict  shall  be  found  for  the  person  or  persons  suing 
such  writ,  or  judgment  given  for  him  or  them  upon  a  demurrer,  or  by 
nil  dicit,  or  for  want  of  a  replication  or  other  pleading,  he  or  they  shall 
recover  his  and  their  damages  and  costs  in  such  manner  as  he  or  they 
might  have  done  in  such  action  on  the  case  as  aforesaid ;  such  costs  and 
damages  to  be  levied  by  capias  ad  satisfaciendum,  fieri  facias,  or  elegit ; 
and  a  peremptory  writ  of  mandamus  shall  be  granted  without  delay, 
for  him  or  them  for  whom  judgment  shall  be  given,  as  might  have  been, 
if  such  return  had  been  adjudged  insufiicient;  and  in  case  judgment 
shall  be  given  for  the  person  or  persons  making  such  return  to  such  writ, 
he  or  they  shall  recover  his  or  their  costs  of  suit,  to  be  levied  in  manner 
aforesaid. 

3.  Provided  always.  That  if  any  damages  shall  be  recovered  by  virtue 
of  this  act  against  any  such  person  or  persons  making  such  return  to  such 
writ  as  aforesaid,  he  or  they  shall  not  be  liable  to  be  sued  in  any  other 
action  or  suit,  for  the  making  such  return ;  any  law,  usage,  or  custom  to 
the  contrary  thereof  in  anywise  notwithstanding. 

6.  That  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  to  and  for  the  said  Courts  respec- 
tively, to  allow  to  such  person  or  persons  respectively,  to  whom  any  writ 
of  mandamus  shall  be  directed,  in  any  of  the  cases  aforesaid,  or  to  the 

{h)  See  Stat.  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4,  s.  6,  post,  p.  444. 


474  tapping's    mandamus. 

person  or  persons  wlio  sliull  sue  or  prosecute  tlie  same,  sucb  convenient 
time  respectively,  to  make  a  return,  plead,  reply,  rejoin  or  demur,  as  to 
the  said  Courts  respectively  shall  acem  just  and  reasonable;  anything 
herein  contained  to  the  contrary  thereof  in  anywise  notwithstanding. 

7.  That  after  the  said  first  day  of  Trinity  Terra,  an  act  made  in  the 
fourth  year  of  her  Majesty's  reign,  intituled,  <'  An  Act  for  the  Amend- 
ment of  the  Law,  and  the  better  Advancement  of  Justice,"  and  all  the 
statutes  of  jeofayles,  shall  be  extended  to  all  writs  of  mandamus  and 
proceedings  thereon,  for  any  the  matters  in  this  act  mentioned. 


1  Geo.  1,  ST.  2,  c.  13. 

An  Act  for  the  furtlier  Securifi/  of  Ilis  Majesties  Person  and  Govern- 
ment, and  the  Succession  of  the  Crown  in  the  Heirs  of  the  late  Princess 
Soj>hia,  heing  Protestants;  and  for  Extinguish imj  the  Hopes  of  the 
Pretended  Prince  of  ^Vales,  and  his  Open  and  Secret  Ahetters.(a) 

By  sect.  11,  it  is  enacted.  That  if  any  head  or  member  of  any  college 
or  hall  within  either  of  the  Universities  of  Oxford  or  Cambridge,  that 
are  or  shall  be  of  the  foundation,  or  that  do  or  shall  enjoy  any  exhibi- 
tion, being  of  (or  as  soon  as  he  shall  attain)  the  age  of  eighteen  years, 
shall  neglect  or  refuse  to  take  and  subscribe  the  several  oaths  in  this  act 
mentioned,  according  to  the  true  intent  and  meaning  of  this  act,  or  to 
produce  a  certificate  thereof,  under  the  hand  of  some  proper  oflBcer  of 
the  respective  Court,  and  cause  the  same  to  be  entered  in  the  register  of 
such  college  or  hall  within  one  month  after  his  having  taken  and  subscribed 
r*/14.Tl  *-^^  ^^^^  oaths;  and  if  the  *persons  in  whom  the  right  of  election 
"-of  such  head  or  member  shall  be,  do  neglect  or  refuse  to  elect 
some  other  fitting  or  proper  person,  in  the  place  or  stead  of  such  head  or 
member  so  neglecting  and  refusing  to  take  and  subscribe  the  said  oaths 
as  aforesaid,  by  the  space  of  twelve  months  after  such  neglect  or  refusal, 
that  then,  and  from  thenceforth,  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  unto  and  for 
the  king's  most  excellent  majesty,  his  heirs  and  successors,  under  the 
great  seal  or  sign  manual,  to  nominate  and  appoint  some  fitting  person, 
qualified  according  to  the  local  statutes  of  such  college  or  hall,  to  succeed 
to  the  place  of  such  person  who  shall  neglect  or  refuse  to  take  and  sub- 
scribe the  said  oaths;  and  that  every  person  so  to  be  nominated  and  ap- 
pointed, shall  have  and  enjoy  such  place  to  which  he  shall  be  nominated 
and  appointed  as  aforesaid,  to  all  intents  and  purposes  whatsoever,  and  all 
benefits,  privileges,  and  advantages  to  the  same  belonging  and  appertain- 
ing, as  if  such  person  had  been  elected  and  chosen  by  the  proper  electors 
of  such  college  or  hall. 

[a)  Only  so  much  of  this  statute  is  given  as  has  relation  to  the  subject  "manda- 
mus."    See  ante,  tits.  "  College,"  p.  76.  and  "  University,"  p.  267. 


APPENDIX.  475 

12.  That  if  the  Lead  of  any  college  or  hall  in  either  of  the  universities, 
or  other  person  or  persons  lawfully  authorized  to  admit,  shall  refuse  or 
neglect  to  admit  such  persons  so  nominated  and  appointed  under  the  great 
seal  or  sign  manual  as  aforesaid,  hy  the  space  of  ten  days  after  such  ad- 
mission shall  be  demanded  of  him  or  them,  who  ought  to  make  such  ad- 
mission to  such  place  as  he  shall  be  nominated  to  as  aforesaid,  that  then 
and  in  such  case  the  local  visitor  or  visitors  of  such  college  or  hall  is 
hereby  authorized  and  required  to  admit  and  place  such  person  so  nomi- 
nated and  appointed  to  such  place  as  he  shall  be  nominated  to  as  aforesaid, 
within  the  space  of  one  month  after  the  same  shall  be  demanded  of  such 
visitor ;  and  in  case  such  visitor  shall  neglect  or  refuse  to  admit  as  afore- 
said, during  the  space  of  one  month  after  the  same  is  lawfully  demanded 
of  such  visitor,  that  then  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  to  and  for  the  Court 
of  King's  Bench  at  Westminster,  to  issue  out  a  writ  of  mandamus  to  be 
directed  to  such  visitor  or  visitors,  to  admit  such  person  to  such  place, 
and  to  proceed  upon  the  said  writ,  according  to  the  course  of  the  said 
Court  in  such  cases. 

13.  Provided  always,  That  any  person  who  by  any  neglect  or  refusal 
according  to  this  act,  shall  lose  or  forfeit  any  oiEce,  may  be  capable  of  a 
new  grant  of  the  said  office,  or  of  any  other,  and  have  and  hold  the  same 
again,  such  person  taking  the  said  oaths  in  such  manner  as  aforesaid,  so 
as  such  office  be  not  granted  to,  or  actually  enjoyed  by  some  person  at 
the  time  of  regranting  thereof. 

14.  Provided  also,  That  nothing  herein  contained  shall  be  construed 
to  extend  to  any  person  in  his  majesties  service  on  board  the  fleet,  or  to 
any  person  whatsoever  who  shall  go  beyond  the  seas  before  the  first  day 
of  November  next,  so  as  such  person  take  the  said  oaths,  and  subscribe 
thereunto  as  aforesaid,  according  to  the  appointment  of  this  act,  within 
three  months  after  his  return. 


*11  Geo.  1,  c.  4.(a)  [*442] 

An  Art  for  Preventing  the  Inconveniences  arising  for  want  of  Elections 
of  Mayors,  or  other  Oliief  Magistrates  of  Boroughs  or  Corporations 
hving  made  vpon  the  Days  appointed  hy  Charter  or  Usage  for  that 
Purpose,  and  directing  in  v:hat  Manner  such  Elections  shall  he  after- 
rear  ds  made. {I i) 

Whereas  in  many  cities,  boroughs,  and  towns  corporate  within  that 

(a)  Only  so  much  of  this  act  is  given  as  appertains  to  the  subject  "  mandamus." 
This  act  is  continued  by  the  7  Wm.  4,  and  1  Vict.  c.  78,  s.  26,  which  see  post,  450, 
and  being  a  remedial  one,  receives  a  liberal  construction.  R.  v.  Pole,  B.  R.  T.  7  & 
8  Geo.  2. 

(i)  The  contests  in  the  City  of  London,  as  to  the  election  of  municipal  officers, 
induced  the  passing  of  this  act.     R.  v.  Heathcote,  10  Mod.  C3. 


47G  TAPriNG'S     MANDAMUS. 

part  of  Crrcat  Britain  called  England,  Wales,  and  Berwick-upon-Tweed, 
the  election  of  the  mayor,  bailiif,  or  bailiffs,  or  other  chief  officer  or  officers 
is  by  charter  or  ancient  usage  confined  to  a  particular  day  or  time,  with- 
out any  provision  how  to  act  or  proceed,  in  case  no  election  be  then  made ; 
and  it  frequently  happens  that  by  such  charter  or  usage  particular  acts 
are  required  to  be  done  at  certain  times,  in  order  to  and  for  the  completing 
of  such  elections,  and  by  the  contrivance  or  default  of  the  person  or  per- 
sons who  ought  to  hold  the  Court,  or  preside  in  the  assembly  where  such, 
elections  are  to  be  made,  or  such  acts  to  be  done,  or  by  accident  it  hath 
sometimes  happened,  and  may  frequently  do  so,  if  not  timely  prevented, 
that  no  Courts  or  assemblies  have  been  held,  or  elections  made,  or  such 
acts  done  within  the  time  fixed  for  that  purpose ;  in  which  cases,  if  elec- 
tions of  such  officers  could  not  afterwards  be  made  or  completed,  or,  in 
consequence  of  such  omission,  the  corporation  should  be  dissolved,  great 
mischiefs  might  ensue  :  for  remedy  and  prevention  whereof  it  is  enacted, 
That  if  in  any  city,  borough,  or  town  corporate,  within  that  part  of  Great 
Britain  called  England,  Wales,  and  Berwick-upon-Tweed,  no  election(c) 
shall  be  made  of  the  mayor,  bailiff  or  bailiffs,  or  other  chief  officer  or 
officers  of  such  city,  borough,  or  town  corporate,  upon  the  day,  or  within 
the  time  appointed  by  charter  or  usage  for  such  election,  or  such  election 
being  made,  shall  afterwards  become  void,  whether  such  omission  or  avoid- 
ance shall  happen  through  the  default  of  the  officer  or  officers  who  ought 
to  hold  the  Court,  or  preside  where  such  election  is  to  be  made,  or  by  any 
accident  or  other  means  whatsoever,  the  corporation  shall  not  thereby  be 
deemed  or  taken  to  be  dissolved  or  isabled  from  electing  such  officer  or 
officers  for  the  future :  but  in  any  case  where  no  election  shall  be  made, 
as  aforesaid,  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  for  the  members  or  persons  of  such 
city,  borough,  or  corporation,  who  have  right  to  vote,  or  be  present  at,  or 
to  do  any  other  act  necessary  to  be  done,  in  order  to  or  for  the  completing 
of  such  election ;  and  they,  or  such  of  them  as  shall  not  be  hindered  by 
any  reasonable  impediment  or  excuse,  are  hereby  required  respectively  to 
meet  or  assemble  together  in  the  town-hall,  or  other  usual  place  of  meet- 
ing for  making  such  election,  within  such  city,  borough,  or  town  corporate, 
upon  the  day  next  after  the  expiration  of  the  time  within  which  such 
election  ought  to  have  been  made,  unless  such  day  shall  happen  to  be  Sun- 
day, and  then  upon  the  Monday  following,  between  the  hours  of  ten  in 
the  morning  and  two  in  the  afternoon  of  the  same  day ;  and  that  the  mem- 
bers or  persons  having  right  to  vote  at,  or  to  do  any  other  act  necessary  to  be 
done  in  order  to  such  election,  or  such  of  them  as  shall  be  so  assembled  or 
met  together,  shall  forthwith  proceed  to  the  election  of  a  mayor,  bailiff  or 
*bailiffs,  or  other  chief  officer  or  officers  for  such  city,  borough,  or 
'•       *^-'  corporation,  and  to  do  every  act  necessary  to  be  done  in  order  to 

(c)  The  words  "  no  election,"  mean  no  legal  election  ;  therefore,  although  there 
may  have  been  an  election  de  facto,  the  Court  will,  in  some  cases,  award  a  man- 
damus according  to  the  provisions  of  the  act.  R.  v.  Kewsham,  Sajer,  211.  K.  v. 
Bankes,  Burr.  1454.     R.  v.  Colchester  (Mayor),  2  T.  R.  259. 


APPENDIX.  477 

or  for  tlie  completing  of  such  election,  in  such  manner  as  was  usual  in, 
or  in  order  to  the  election  of  such  officer  or  officers,  upon  the  day,  or 
within  the  time  appointed  by  charter  or  usage  for  such  election ;  and  in 
case,  upon  such  day  of  meeting  hereby  appointed  for  such  election,  the 
mayor,  bailiff  or  bailiffs,  or  other  proper  officer  or  officers,  who  ought  to 
have  held  the  Court,  or  presided  at  the  assembly  for  such  election,  or 
doinw  any  other  act  necessary  to  be  done  in  order  to  such  election,  if  the 
same  had  been  made  or  done  on  the  day  fixed,  or  within  the  time  limited 
by  charter  or  usage  for  that  purpose,  shall  be  absent,  then  such  other 
person,  having  a  right  to  vote,  being  the  nearest  then  present  in  place  or 
office  to  the  person  or  persons  so  absenting  himself  or  themselves,  shall 
hold  the  Court,  or  preside  in  the  meeting  or  assembly  hereby  appointed, 
and  shall  have  the  same  power  and  authority  in  all  respects  therein,  as 
belongs  to  the  mayor,  bailiff,  or  bailiffs,  or  other  chief  officer  or  officers  of 
the  same  city,  borough,  or  town  corporate,  at  any  court  or  assembly  for 
the  election  of  officers  for  such  place,  or  for  doing  any  other  act  necessary 
to  be  done  in  order  to  such  election. 

2.  That  if  it  shall  happen  that  in  any  city,  borough,  or  town  corporate 
within  that  part  of  Great  Britain  called  England,  Wales,  and  Berwick- 
upon-Tweed,  no  election  shall  be  made  of  the  mayor,  bailiff  or  bailiffs,  or 
other  chief  officer  or  officers  of  such  city,  borough,  or  town  corporate  upon 
the  day,  or  within  the  time  appointed  by  charter  or  usage  for  that  pur- 
pose, and  that  no  election  of  such  officer  or  officers,  shall  be  made  pur- 
suant to  the  directions  hereinbefore  prescribed,  or  such  election  being 
made,  shall  afterwards  become  void,  as  aforesaid,  in  every  such  case  it 
shall  and  may  be  lawful  for  his  Majesty's  Court  of  King's  Bench,  upon 
motion  to  be  made  in  the  said  Court,  to  award  a  writ  or  writs  of  manda- 
mus, requiring  the  members  or  persons  of  such  city,  borough,  or  town 
corporate,  having  a  right  to  vote  at,  or  to  do  any  other  act  necessary  to 
be  done  in  order  to  such  election  respectively,  to  assemble  themselves 
upon  a  day  and  at  a  time  to  be  prefixed  in  such  writ  or  writs,  and  to  pro- 
ceed to  the  election  of  a  mayor,  bailiff  or  bailiffs,  or  other  chief  officer  or 
officers,  as  the  case  shall  require,  and  to  do  every  act  necessary  to  be  done 
in  order  to  such  election,  or  to  signifie  to  the  said  Court  good  cause  to  the 
contrary,  and  thereupon  to  cause  such  proceedings  to  be  had  and  made  as 
in  other  cases  of  writs  of  mandamus,  granted  by  the  said  Court  for  elec- 
tion of  officers  of  corporations,  and  of  the  day  and  time  appointed  in  and 
by  any  such  writ  or  writs  of  mandamus  for  holding  such  assembly,  public 
notice  in  writing  shall,  by  such  person  as  the  Court  shall  appoint,  be 
affixed  in  the  market-place,  or  some  other  public  place  within  such  city, 
borough,  or  town  corporate,  by  the  space  of  six  days  before  the  day  so 
appointed,  and  such  officer  or  other  person  respectively  shall  preside  in 
such  assembly  as  ought  to  have  presided  at  the  election  of  such  mayor, 
bailiff  or  bailiffs,  or  other  chief  officer  or  officers,  or  at  the  doing  any 
other  act  necessary  to  be  done  in  order  to  such  election,  in  case  the  same 


478  tapping's    mandamus. 

had  been  iiiaJc  or  done  upon  the  day  hereinbefore  prescribed  for  that 
purpose. 

3.  And  whereas  in  certain  boroughs  and  towns  corporate  within  that 
part  of  Great  Britain  called  Engh\nd,  "Wales,  and  Berwick-upon-Tweed, 
the  mayor,  bailiff  or  bailifis,  or  other  chief  officer  or  officers,  is  or  arc  to 
be  nominated,  elected,  or  sworn  at  a  Court  Lcet,  or  view  of  franhpledge 
or  some  other  Court,  and  by  reason  of  the  contrivance  or  default  of  the 
lord,  or  his  steward,  or  such  other  officer,  by  or  before  whom  such  Court 
ought  to  be  held,  in  not  holding  the  same,  or  by  some  accident  it  hath 
happened,  and  may  hereafter  happen,  that  no  due  nomination,  election,  or 
swearing  of  such  mayor,  bailiff  or  bailiffs,  or  other  chief  officer  or  officers, 
hath  been  or  shall  be  had  or  made,  be  it  further  enacted.  That  in  every 
such  case  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  to  and  for  his  Majesty's  Court  of 
King's  Bench,  upon  motion  to  be  *made  in  the  said  Court,  to 
t  ■*     J  award  a  writ  of  mandamus,  requiring  the  lord,  or  his  steward,  or 
other  officer,  by  or  before  whom  such  Court  ought  to  be  held,  to  hold,  or 
cause  to  be  holden,  such  Court  Leet,  or  other  Court,  and  to  do  every  other 
act  necessary  to  be  done  by  him  in  order  to  such  nomination,  election,  or 
swearing,  at  such  day  and  time  as  shall  be  for  that  purpose  judged  proper 
by  the  Court  of  King's  Bench,  and  shall  be  appointed  in  such  writ,  or  to 
signific  to  the  said  Court  good  cause  to  the  contrary,  and  thereupon  to 
cause  such  proceedings  to  be  had  and  made  as  in  other  cases  of  writs  of 
mandamus  granted  by  the  said  Court  for  holding  of  any  Court,  and  of  the 
day  and  time  appointed  in  and  by  any  such  writ  of  mandumns  for  holding 
such  Court,   publick  notice  in  writing  shall  by  such  person  as  the  said 
Court  of  King's  Bench  shall  appoint,  be  affixed  in  the  market-place,  or 
some  other  publick  place  within  such  borough,  or  town  corporate,  by  the 
space  of  six  days  before  the  day  so  appointed ;  and  where  a  nomination 
of  persons  in  order  to  the  election  of  any  such  mayor,  bailiff  or  bailiffs, 
or  other  chief  officer  or  officers,  is  to  be  made  at  such  Court  Leet,  or  other 
Court,  in  every  such  case,  after  such   nomination  made,  all  and  every 
act  and  acts  necessary  to  be  done  in  order  to  such  election,  shall  be  had, 
made,  and  done  at  such  assembly,  and  in  such  manner  and  form  as  the 
same  ought  to  have  been  had,  made  and  done,  in  case  such  election  had 
been  made  upon  the  day  next  after  the  expiration  of  the  time  prescribed 
for  such  election,  by  the  ch;irtcr  or  usage  of  such  borough  or  corporation, 
according  to  the  directions  hereinbefore  mentioned. 

(3.  That  where  any  writ  of  mandainas  shall  issue  out  of  the  Court  of 
King's  Bench,  in  any  of  the  cases  aforesaid,  the  person  or  persons  to 
whom  such  writ  shall  be  directed  shall  make  his  or  their  return  to  the 
£rst  writ  of  mandamus. (^u) 

(a)  See  Stat.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s.  1. 


ATPENDIX.  479 


12  Gko.  n,  c.  21. 

An  Act  for  giving  Relief  in  Proceed inga  vpon  Writs  of  MancJamns  for 
the  Admission  of  Freemen  into  Corporations ;  and  for  other  Purposes 
therein  mentioned. (Jj) 

Whereas  divers  persons,  ■wlio  have  a  right  to  be  aclraitted  citizens,  bur- 
gesses, or  freemen,  of  divers  cities,  towns  corporate,  boroughs,  cinque  ports 
and  phaces,  within  that  part  of  Great  ]>ritain  called  Enghmd  and  Wales, 
being  refused  to  be  admitted  thereto,  have,  in  many  cases  no  other  ordi- 
nary remedy  to  procure  themselves  to  be  admitted  to  the  franchises  of 
being  citizens,  burgesses,  or  freemen,  than  by  writs  of  mandamus,  the 
proceedings  on  whicli  are  very  dilatory  and  expensive;  and,  although  any 
such  writ  of  mnndumus  is  obeyed,  the  person  applying  is  nevertheless 
put  to  great  and  unnecessary  trouble,  delay,  and  expense  :  And  whereas 
by  the  laws  now  in  being,  in  many  cases  no  provision  is  made  for  giving 
costs  to  the  party  suing  out  any  such  writ  where  the  same  is  obeyed; 
for  remedy  whereof,  it  was  enacted,  that  from  and  after  the  first  day  of 
August,  one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  seventy-two,  where  any  person 
shall  be  entitled  to  be  admitted  a  citizen,  burgess,  or  freeman  of  any  such 
city,  town  corporate,  borough,  cinque  port,  or  place,  and  shall  apply  to  the 
mayor,  or  other  person,  ofiioer  or  officers,  in  such  city,  town  corporate, 
borough,  cinque  port,  or  place,  who  hath  or  have  authority  to  admit  citi- 
zens, burgesses,  and  freemen  therein,  to  be  admitted  a  citizen,  burgess,  or 
*freeman  thereof;  and  shall  give  notice,  specifying  the  nature  of  r+j^45-i 
bis  claim,  to  such  mayor,  or  other  officer  or  officers,  that  if  he  or 
they  shall  not  so  admit  such  person  a  citizen,  burgess,  or  freeman,  within 
one  month  from  the  time  of  such  notice,  the  Cgurt  of  King's  Bench  will 
bo  applied  to  for  a  writ  of  mandamus,  to  compel  such  admission;  and  if 
such  mayor,  or  other  officer  or  officers,  shall,  after  such  notice,  refuse  or 
neglect  to  admit  such  person,  and  a  writ  of  mandamus  shall  afterwards 
issue  to  compel  such  mayor,  or  other  officer  or  officers,  to  make  such 
admission,  and,  in  obedience  to  such  writ,  such  persons  shall  be  admitted 
by  the  said  mayor,  or  other  officer  or  officers,  a  citizen,  burgess,  or  free- 
man of  such  city,  town  corporate,  borough,  cinque  port,  or  place,  then 
such  person  shall  (unless  the  Court  shall  see  just  cause  to  tlu;  crn'rary) 
obtain  and  receive  from  the  said  miyor,  or  other  officer  or  cffi -cis  so  ne- 
glecting or  refusing  as  aforesaid,  all  the  costs  to  which  he  shall  have  been 
put  in  applying  for  obtaining  and  serving  such  writ  of  mandamus,  and 
enforcing  the  same,  by  a  rule  to  be  made  by  the  Court  out  of  which  such 
writ  shall  issue,  for  the  payment  thereof,  together  with  the  costs  of  apply- 
ing for,  obtaining,  serving,  an  I  enforcing  the  said  rule;  and  if  the  rule 
so  to  be  made  shall  not  be  obeyed,  then  the  same  shall   be  cnTorccd  in 

(i)  Only  so  much  of  tliis  statute  is  given  as  appertains  to  tlic  siiliject  "  mcrj- 
damus." 


480  TArPINO's     MANDAMUS. 

sucli  manner  as  other  rules  made  by  the  said  Court  are  or  may  be  enforced 
by  hiw. 


38  GEO.  3,  c.  52. 

An  Act  to  regulate  the  Trial  of  Causes,  Indictments,  and  other  Proceed- 
ings, wJiicJi  arise  xoitJiin  the  Counties  of  certain  Cities  and  Toicns  Cor- 
porate icithin  this  Kingdom.{ci)  [1st  June,  1798. 

TThereas  there  at  present  exists,  in  the  counties  of  cities  and  of  towns 
corporate  within  this  kingdom,  an  exclusive  right,  that  all  causes  and 
offences  which  arise  within  their  particular  limits  should  be  tried  by  a 
jury  of  persons  residing  within  the  limits  of  the  county  of  such  city  or 
town  corporate;  which  ancient  privilege,  intended  for  other  and  good  pur- 
poses, has  in  many  instances  been  found,  by  experience,  not  to  conduce 
to  the  ends  of  justice  :  And  whereas  it  will  tend  to  the  more  effectual 
administration  of  justice,  in  certain  cases,  if  actions,  indictments,  and 
other  proceedings,  the  causes  of  which  arise  within  the  counties  of  cities 
and  towns  corporate,  were  tried  in  the  next  adjoining  counties  :  In  order 
therefore  to  remedy  this  mischief  for  the  future,  it  is  enacted,  that  from 
and  after  the  passing  of  this  act,  in  every  action,  whether  the  same  be 
transitory  or  local,  which  shall  be  prosecuted  or  depending  in  any  of  his 
3Iajesty's  Courts  of  Record  at  Westminster,  and  in  every  indictment  re- 
moved into  his  Majesty's  Court  of  King's  Bench  by  writ  of  certiorari,  and 
in  every  information  filed  by  his  Majesty's  attorney  or  solicitor  general, 
or  by  the  leave  of  the  Court  of  King's  Bench,  and  in  all  cases  where  any 
person  or  persons  shall  plead  to  or  traverse  any  of  the  facts  contained  in 
the  return  to  any  writ  of  mandamus,  if  the  venue  in  such  action,  indict- 
ment, or  information,  be  laid  in  the  county  of  any  city  or  town  corporate 
within  that  part  of  Great  Britain  called  England,  or  if  such  writ  of  man- 
damus be  directed  to  any  person  or  persons,  body  politick  and  corporate, 
that  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  for  the  Court  in  which  such  action,  indict- 
ment, information,  or  other  proceeding  shall  be  depending,  at  the  prayer 
and  instance  of  any  prosecutor  or  plaintiff,  or  of  any  defendant,  to  direct 
the  issue  or  issues  joined  in  such  action,  indictment,  information,  or  pro- 
r*-lin  ceeding,  to  be  tried  by  a  jury  of  the  *county  next  adjoining  to  the 
county  of  such  city  or  town  corporate,  and  to  award  proper  writs 
of  venire  and  distringas  accordingly,  if  the  said  Court  shall  think  it  fit 
and  proper  so  to  do. 

IX.  And  be  it  further  enacted  by  the  authority  aforesaid,  that  for  the 
purposes  of  this  act,  the  county  of  York  shall  be  considered  the  next  ad- 
joining county  to  the  county  of  the  town  of  Kingston-upon-IIull;  the 

[a]  Only  so  much  of  this  act  is  here  given  as  relates  to  the  subject  "Man- 
damus." 


APPENDIX.  481 

county  of  Northumberland  as  the  next  adjoining  county  to  the  county  of 
the  town  of  Newcastle-upon-Tyne. 

X.  Provided  always,  that  nothing  contained  in  this  act  shall  extend,  or 
be  construed  to  extend,  to  the  cities  of  London  and  Westminster,  or  the 
borough  of  Southwark,  or  the  city  or  county  of  the  city  of  Bristol,  or  the 
city  or  county  of  the  city  of  Chester,  or  to  the  criminal  jurisdiction  of  the 
city  of  Exeter  and  county  of  the  same  city,  unless  in  cases  of  indict- 
ment removed  into  his  Majesty's  Court  of  King's  Bench  by  writ  of  certi- 
orari, from  any  court  of  criminal  jurisdiction,  within  the  said  city  or 
county  of  the  said  city  of  Exeter. 

XI.  Provided  also,  that  nothing  in  this  act  shall  extend,  or  be  construed 
to  extend,  to  take  away  any  other  rights  or  privileges  which  have  been 
anciently  granted  to  such  corporations,  by  royal  charters  or  grants,  and 
which  have  been  immemorially  held  and  enjoyed  by  such  corporations; 
but  that  they  shall  continue  in  the  full  possession  of  all  their  other  exclu- 
sive rights  and  privileges  as  much  as  if  this  act  of  Parliament  had  never 
passed,  and  that  they  shall  not  be  obliged  to  attend  as  jurymen  upon  the 
trial  of  any  cause  or  any  indictment  which  may  be  removed  from  the 
limited  jui'isdiction  to  the  county  at  large,  nor  upon  the  trial  of  any  other 
cause,  or  any  other  indictment,  which  may  be  tried  before  his  Majesty's 
justices  of  assize,  oyer  and  terminer,  and  general  gaol  delivery,  in  the  next 
adjoining  county. 


1  Wm.  4,  c.  21. 

An  Act  to  improve  the  Proceedings  in  ProMhition  and  on  Wi-its  of  Man- 
damus.(a)  [30th  March,  1831. 

Sect.  3.  And  whereas  the  provisions  contained  in  a  certain  act  of  Par- 
liament passed  in  the  ninth  year  of  the  reign  of  queen  Anne,  intituled 
"  An  Act  for  rendering  the  Procedings  upon  writs  of  Mandamus  and  In- 
formations in  the  Nature  of  a  Quo  warranto  more  speedy  and  effectual, 
and  for  the  more  easy  trying  and  determining  the  Rights  of  Offices  and 
Franchises  in  Corporations  and  Boroughs,"  relating  to  the  writs  of  man- 
damus therein  mentioned,  have  heen  found  useful  and  convenient,  and  the 
same  ought  to  he  extended  to  the  proceedings  on  other  such  writs ;  it  is 
enacted,  that  the  several  enactments  contained  in  the  said^statute  relating 
to  the  return  to  writs  of  mandamus,  and  the  proceedings  on  such  returns, 
and  to  the  recovery  of  damages  and  costs,  shall  he  and  the  same  are  hereby 
extended  and  made  applicable  to  all  other  writs  of  mandamus,  and  the 
proceedings  thereon,  except  so  far  only  as  the  same  may  be  varied  or  altered 
by  this  act. 

(a)  Only  so  much  of  this  act  is  here  given  as  relates  to  "  Mandamus."  This  act 
is  recited  in  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  post,  p.  451. 

June,  1852.— 31 


482  tapping's    mandamus. 

Sect.  4.  And  whereas  writs  of  mandamus,  {other  than  such  as  relate  to 
the  offices  and  franchises  mentioned  in  or  provided  for  l>/  the  said  act 
made  in  the  ninth  year  of  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne,)  are  sometimes  issued 
to  officers  and  other  persons,  commanding  them  to  admit  to  offices,  or  do 
or  perform  other  matters,  in  respect  whereof  the  persons  to  whom  such 
writs  arc  directed  claim  no  right  or  interest,  or  whose  functions  are  merely 
ministerial  in  relation  to  such  offices  or  matters ;  and  it  may  be  proper 
.  that  such  officers  and  persons  should  in  certain  cases  be  *protect- 
^  ^  cd  against  the  payment  of  damages  or  costs  to  which  they  may 
otherwise  become  liable ;  it  is  enacted,  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the 
Court  to  which  application  may  be  made  for  any  writ  of  mandamus,  (other 
than  such  as  relate  to  the  said  offices  and  franchises  mentioned  in  or  pro- 
vided for  hy  the  said  act  made  in  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne,)  if  such  Court 
shall  see  fit  so  to  do,  to  make  rules  and  orders,  calling  not  only  upon  the 
person  to  whom  such  writ  may  be  required  to  issue,  but  also  all  and  every 
other  person  having  or  claiming  any  right  or  interest  in  or  to  the  matter 
of  such  writ,  to  shew  cause  against  the  issuing  of  such  writ  and  payment 
of  costs  of  the  application  :  and  upon  the  appearance  of  such  other  person 
in  compliance  with  such  rules,  or  in  default  of  appearance  after  service 
thereof;  to  exercise  all  such  powers  and  authorities,  and  make  all  such 
rules  and  orders,  applicable  to  the  case,  as  are  or  may  be  given  or  men- 
tioned ly  or  in  any  act  passed  or  to  he  passed  during  this  present  session 
of  Parliament  for  giving  relief  against  adverse  claims  made  npon  persons 
having  no  interest  in  the  subject  of  such  claims  :{a)  Provided  always,  that 
the  return  to  be  made  to  any  such  writ,  and  issues  joined  in  fact  or  in 
law  upon  any  traverse  thereof,  or  upon  any  demurrer,  shall  be  made  and 
joined  by  and  in  the  name  of  the  person  to  whom  such  writ  shall  be  direct- 
ed; but  nevertheless  the  same  shall  and  may,  if  the  Court  shall  think  fit 
so  to  direct,  be  expressed  to  be  made  and  joined  on  the  behalf  of  such 
other  person  as  may  be  mentioned  in  such  rules ;  and  in  that  case  such 
other  person  shall  be  permitted  to  frame  the  return,  and  to  conduct  the 
subsequent  proceedings,  at  his  own  expense;  and  in  such  case,  if  any 
judgment  shall  be  given  for  or  against  the  party  suing  such  writ,  such 
judgment  shall  be  given  against  or  for  the  person  or  persons  on  whose 
behalf  the  return  shall  be  expressed  to  be  made,  and  who  shall  have  the  like 
remedy  for  the  recovery  of  costs  and  enforcing  the  judgment  as  the  person 
to  whom  the  wi'it  shall  have  been  directed  might  and  would  otherwise 
have  had. 

Sect.  5.  That  in  case  the  return  to  any  such  writ  shall,  in  pursuance 
of  the  authority  given  by  this  act,  be  expressed  to  be  made  on  behalf  of 
any  other  person  as  aforesaid,  the  further  proceedings  on  such  writ  shall 
not  abate  or  be  discontinued  by  the  death  or  resignation  of,  or  removal 
from  office  of,  the  person  having  made  such  return,  but  the  same  shall 

(a)  There  was  no  act  to  that  effect  passed  in  the  "  then  present  session  of  Par- 
liament ;"  but  see  1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  58,  post,  p.  448,  which  is  by  sect.  8,  substituted 
for  it. 


APPENDIX.  483 

and  may  be  continued  and  carried  on  in  the  name  of  such  person;  and  if 
a  peremptory  writ  shall  be  awarded,  the  same  shall  and  may  be  directed 
to  any  successor  in  office  or  right  to  such  person. 

Sect.  6.  And  for  making  some  further  provision  for  the  payment  of 
costs  on  applications  for  mandamus,  be  it  further  enacted.  That  in  all 
cases  of  application  for  any  writ  of  mandamus  whatsoever,  the  costs  of 
such  application,  (johefJicr  the  ivrit  shall  he  granted  or  refused,)  and  also 
the  costs  of  the  writ,  if  the  same  shall  be  issued  and  obeyed,  shall  he  in 
the  discretion  of  the  Court,  and  the  Court  is  hereby  authorized  to  order 
and  direct  by  whom  and  to  whom  the  same  shall  be  paid. 


*1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  58.  [*448] 

An  Act  to  enable  Courts  of  Law  to  give  Relief  against  adverse  Claims 
made  upon  Persons  having  no  Interest  in  the  Subject  of  such  Claims,  (a) 

[20th  October,  1831. 

Whereas  it  often  happens  that  a  person  sued  at  law  for  the  recovery 
of  money  or  goods  wherein  he  has  no  interest,  and  which  are  also  claimed 
of  him  by  some  third  party,  has  no  means  of  relieving  himself  from  such 
adverse  claims  but  by  a  suit  in  equity  against  the  plaintiff  and  such  third 
party,  usually  called  a  bill  of  interpleader,  which  is  attended  with  expense 
and  delay ;  for  remedy  thereof  IT  is  enacted.  That  upon  application 
made  by  or  on  behalf  of  any  defendant  sued  in  any  of  his  Majesty's 
Courts  of  Law  at  Westminster,  or  in  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  the 
County  Palatine  of  Lancaster,  or  the  Court  of  Pleas  of  the  County  Pala- 
tine of  Durham,  in  any  action  of  assumpsit,  debt,  detinue,  or  trover,  such 
application  being  made  after  declaration,  and  before  plea,  by  affidavit  or 
otherwise,  showing  that  such  defendant  does  not  claim  any  interest  in  the 
subject-matter  of  the  suit,  but  that  the  right  thereto  is  claimed  or  sup- 
posed to  belong  to  some  third  party  who  has  sued  or  is  expected  to  sue 
for  the  same,  and  that  such  defendant  does  not  in  any  manner  collude 
with  such  third  party,  but  is  ready  to  bring  into  Court  or  to  pay  or  dis- 
pose of  the  subject-matter  of  the  action  in  such  manner  as  the  Court  (or 
any  Judge  thereof)  may  order  or  direct,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Court, 
or  any  Judge  thereof,  to  make  rules  and  orders  calling  upon  such  third 
party  to  appear  and  to  state  the  nature  and  particulars  of  his  claim,  and 
maintain  or  relinquish  his  claim,  and  upon  such  rule  or  order  to  hear  the 
allegations  as  well  of  such  third  party  as  of  the  plaintiff,  and  in  the 
meantime  to  stay  the  proceedings  in  such  action,  and  finally  to  order  such 
third  party  to  make  himself  defendant  in  the  same  or  some  other  action, 
or  to  proceed  to  trial  on  one  or  more  feigned  issue  or  issues,  and  also  to 

{a)  This  statute  being  in  effect  (see  sect.  8,  post,  p.  449,)  referred  to  by  1  Wm. 
4,  c.  21,  s.  4,  ante,  p.  446,  and  its  provisions  generally  being  made  applicable  to 
the  writ  of  maudamus  by  such  last  mentioned  act,  it  is  therefore  given  at  length. 


48-1  T  A  r  p  I N  a '  s    mandamus. 

direct  which  of  the  parties  shall  be  plaiutiff  or  defendant  on  such  trial, 
or,  with  the  consent  of  the  plaintiff  and  such  third  party,  their  counsel 
or  attorneys,  to  dispose  of  the  merits  of  their  claims  and  determine  the 
same  in  a  summary  manner,  and  to  make  such  other  rules  and  orders 
therein,  as  to  costs  and  all  other  matters,  as  may  appear  to  be  just  and 
reasonable. 

II.  And  be  it  further  enacted,  That  the  judgment  in  any  such  action 
or  issue  as  may  be  directed  by  the  Court  or  Judge,  and  the  decision 
of  the  Court  or  Judge  in  a  summary  manner,  shall  be  final  and  con- 
clusive against  the  parties,  and  all  persons  claiming  by,  from,  or  under 
them. 

III.  And  be  it  further  enacted,  That  if  such  third  party  shall  not 
appear  upon  such  rule  or  order  to  maintain  or  relinquish  his  claim,  being 
duly  served  therewith,  or  shall  neglect  or  refuse  to  comply  with  any  rule 
or  order  to  be  made  after  appearance,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Court  or 
Judge  to  declare  such  third  party,  and  all  persons  claiming  by,  from,  or 
under  him,  to  be  for  ever  barred  from  prosecuting  his  claim  against  the 
original  defendant,  his  executors  or  administrators;  saving  nevertheless 
the  right  or  claim  of  siich  third  iiarty  against  the  plaintiff ;  and  there- 
upon to  make  such  order  between  such  defendant  and  the  plaintiff,  as  to 
costs  and  other  matters,  as  may  appear  just  and  reasonable. 

IV.  Provided  always,  and  be  it  further  enacted,  That  no  order  shall  be 
made  in  pursuance  of  this  act  by  a  single  Judge  of  the  Court  of  Pleas  of 
r*-llQl  ^^'^  ^^^^  County  Palatine  of  Durham  who  shall  not  also  be  '''a 

Judge  of  one  of  the  said  Courts  at  Westminster,  and  that  every 
order  to  be  made  in  pursuance  of  this  act  by  a  single  Judge  not  sitting 
in  open  Court,  shall  be  liable  to  be  rescinded  or  altered  by  the  Court  in 
like  manner  as  other  orders  made  by  a  single  Judge. 

V.  Provided  also,  and  be  it  further  enacted,  That  if  upon  application 
to  a  Judge,  in  the  first  instance  or  in  any  latter  stage  of  the  proceedings, 
he  shall  think  the  matter  more  fit  for  the  decision  of  the  Court,  it  shall 
be  lawful  for  him  to  refer  the  matter  to  the  Court ;  and  thereupon  the 
Court  shall  and  may  hear  and  dispose  of  the  same  in  the  same  manner  as 
if  the  proceeding  had  originally  commenced  by  rule  of  Court,  instead  of 
the  order  of  a  Judge. 

VI.  And  whereas  difficulties  sometimes  arise  in  the  execution  of  pro- 
cess against  goods  and  chattels,  issued  by  or  under  the  authority  of  the 
said  Courts,  by  reason  of  claims  made  to  such  goods  and  chattels  by 
assignees  of  bankrupts  and  other  persons  not  being  the  parties  against 
whom  such  process  has  issued,  whereby  sheriffs  and  other  offiicers  are  ex- 
posed to  the  hazard  and  expense  of  actions ;  and  it  is  reasonable  to  afford 
relief  and  protection  in  such  cases  to  such  sheriffs  and  other  officers  ;  be 
it  therefore  further  enacted,  That  when  any  such  claim  shall  be  made  to 
any  goods  or  chattels  taken  or  intended  to  be  taken  in  execution  under 
any  such  process,  or  to  the  proceeds  or  value  thereof,  it  shall  and  may  be 
lawful  to  and  for  the  Court  from  which  the  process  issued,  upon  applica- 


APPENDIX.  485 

tion  of  such  sheriiF  or  other  oflGicer  made  before  or  after  the  return  of  such 
process,  and  as  well  before  as  after  any  action  brought  against  such  sheriff 
or  other  officer,  to  call  before  them,  by  rule  of  Court,  as  well  the  party 
issuing  such  process  as  the  party  making  such  claim,  and  thereupon  to  ex- 
ercise, for  the  adjustment  of  such  claims  and  the  relief  and  protection  of 
the  sheriff  or  other  officer,  all  or  any  of  the  powers  and  authorities  herein- 
before contained,  and  make  such  rules  and  decisions  as  shall  appear  to  be 
just  according  to  the  circumstances  of  the  case ;  and  the  cost  of  all  such 
proceedings  shall  be  in  the  discretion  of  the  Court. 

VII.  And  be  it  further  enacted,  That  all  rules,  orders,  matters,  and 
decisions  to  be  made  and  done  in  pursuance  of  this  act,  except  only  the 
affidavits  to  be  filed,  may,  together  with  the  declaration  in  the  cause,  (if 
any),  be  entered  of  record,  with  a  note  in  the  margin  expressing  the  true 
date  of  such  entry,  to  the  end  that  the  same  may  be  evidence  in  future 
times,  if  required,  and  to  secure  and  enforce  the  payment  of  costs  directed 
by  such  rule  or  order ;  and  every  such  rule  or  order  so  entered  shall  have 
the  force  and  effect  of  a  judgment,  except  only  as  to  becoming  a  charge  on 
any  lands,  tenements,  or  hereditaments  ;  and  in  case  any  costs  shall  not  be 
paid  within  fifteen  days  after  notice  of  the  taxation  and  amount  thereof 
given  to  the  party  ordered  to  pay  the  same,  his  agent  or  attorney,  execu- 
tion may  issue  for  the  same  by  fieri  facias  or  capias  ad  satisfaciendum, 
adapted  to  the  case,  together  with  the  costs  of  such  entry,  and  of  the  ex- 
ecution if  by  fieri  facias ;  and  such  writ  and  writs  may  bear  teste  on  the 
day  of  issuing  the  same,  whether  in  Term  or  Vacation  ;  and  the  sheriff  or 
other  officer  executing  any  such  writ  shall  be  entitled  to  the  same  fees,  and 
no  more  as  upon  any  similar  writ  grounded  upon  a  judgment  of  the  Court. 

VIII.  And  whereas  by  a  certain  act  made  and  passed  in  the  last  ses- 
sion of  Parliament,  intituled  "An  Act  to  improve  the  Proceedings  in 
Prohibition  and  on  Writs  of  Man  damns,  "(a)  it  was  among  other  things 
enacted,  that  it  should  be  lawful  for  the  Court  to  which  application  may 
be  made  for  any  such  writ  of  viandavnis  as  is  therein  in  that  behalf  men- 
tioned to  make  rules  and  orders  calling,  not  only  upon  the  person  to  whom 
such  writ  may  be  required  to  issue,  but  also  all  and  every  other  person  having 
or  claiming  any  right  or  interest  in  or  to  the  matter  of  such  writ,  to  show 
cause  against  the  issuing  of  *such  writ  and  payment  of  the  costs  of  j^.  .^-, 
the  application ;  and  upon  the  appearance  of  such  other  person  in  com-  L  ^ 
pliance  with  such  rules,  or  in  default  of  appearance  after  service  thereof; 
to  exercise  ail  such  powers  and  authorities,  and  make  all  such  rules  and 
orders  applicable  to  the  case,  as  were  or  might  be  given  or  mentioned  by 
or  in  any  act  passed  or  to  be  passed  during  that  present  session  of  Parlia- 
ment for  giving  relief  against  adverse  claims  made  upon  persons  having 
no  interest  in  the  subject  of  such  claims  :  And  whereas  no  such  act  was 
passed  during  the  then  present  session  of  Parliament ;  be  it  therefore  en- 
acted, That  upon  any  such  application  as  is  in  the  said  act  and  hereinbe- 
fore mentioned,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  Court  to  exercise  all  such  powers 

(a)  See  act  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  ante,  p.  446. 


486  TAPriNO's    MANDAMUS. 

and  authorities,  and  make  all  sucli  rules  and  orders  applicable  to  tlic  case, 
as  are  given  or  mentioned  by  or  in  this  present  act. 


1  Vict.  c.  78. 

An  Act  to  amend  an  Act  for  tlie  Regulation  of  Municipal  Corporations 
in  England  and  Wales.{a)  [17th  July,  1837. 

Whereas  an  act  was  passed  in  the  fifth  and  sixth  years  of  the  reign 
of  his  present  Majesty,  intituled  "  zVn  Act  to  provide  for  the  Regulation 
of  municipal  Corporations  in  England  and  Wales,"  providing  among  other 
things  for  the  election  of  certain  ofl&cers  in  manner  and  form  therein  de- 
clared, but  such  elections  have  not  in  all  cases  been  duly  made  according 
to  the  provisions  of  the  said  act :  And  whereas  doubts  are  entertained  by 
and  before  whom  the  meetings  for  such  elections  can  now  be  convened 
and  holden  for  the  purpose  of  supplying  such  deficiencies :  And  whereas 
the  elections  of  corporate  officers  and  others  are  liable  to  be  questioned  by 
reason  of  any  defect  that  may  be  in  the  title  of  the  presiding  officer 
before  whom  the  election  may  have  been  had,  notwithstanding  that  the 
election  may  have  been  otherwise  good  in  all  respects  :  For  remedy  thereof 
it  is  enacted : 

Sect.  2-i.  That  it  shall  be  lawful  for  any  person  whose  claim  shall  have 
been  rejected  or  name  expunged  at  the  revision  of  the  burgess  roll  of  any 
of  the  said  boroughs  to  apply  before  the  end  of  the  Term  then  next  fol- 
lowing, to  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  for  a  mandamus  to  the  mayor  for 
the  time  being  of  that  borough  to  insert  his  name  upon  the  burgess  roll, 
and  thereupon  for  the  Court  to  inquire  into  the  title  of  the  applicant 
to  be  so  enrolled ;  and  if  the  Court  shall  award  such  mandamus  the 
mayor  shall  be  bound  to  insert  the  name  upon  the  burgess  roll, 
and  shall  add  thereunto  the  words  "  By  Order  of  the  Court  of  King's 
Bench,"  and  shall  subscribe  his  name  to  such  words ;  and  thereupon  the 
person  whose  name  shall  be  so  added  to  the  burgess  roll  shall  be  deemed 
a  burgess,  and  entitled  to  vote  and  act  as  a  burgess  in  all  respects  as  if 
his  name  had  been  put  upon  the  burgess  roll  by  the  mayor  and  assessors ; 
and  upon  every  such  application  the  Court  shall  have  power  to  make  such 
order  with  respect  to  the  costs  as  to  the  Court  shall  seem  fit. 

Sect.  26.  And  be  it  enacted,  that  after  the  passing  of  this  act  all  the 
powers,  authorities,  and  jurisdictions  by  an  act  of  the  eleventh  year  of  the 
rcifn  of  his  late  Majesty  King  George  the  First,  intituled  "  An  Act  for 
preventing  the  Inconveniences  arising  from  want  of  elections  of  Mayors  or 
other  chief  Magistrates  of  boroughs  or  corporations  being  made  upon  the 
days  appointed  by  charter  or  usage  for  that  purpose,  and  directing  in  what 
manner  such  elections  should  be  afterwards  *made,"(Z')  given  to 
[  -i^l]  i^jg  Majesty's  Court  of  King's  Bench  in  cases  where  no  election 

(a)  Only  so  much  of  this  act  is  given  as  appertains  to  the  subject  "Mandamus." 
(6)  See  the  act,  ante,  p.  442. 


APPENDIX.  487 

shall  be  made  of  the  mayor,  bailiff  and  bailiffs,,  or  other  chief  officer  or 
officers,  of  cities,  boroughs,  or  towns  corporate,  upon  the  day  or  within 
the  time  appointed  by  charter  or  usage  for  that  purpose,  and  that  no  elec- 
tion is  made  pursuant  to  the  directions  in  that  act  prescribed,  or  such 
election  being  made  shall  afterwards  become  void  as  in  that  act  mentioned 
shall  and  the  same  are  hereby  extended  to  all  cases  in  which  no  election, 
shall  be  made  of  any  mayor,  alderman,  councillor,  or  other  corporate 
officer,  or  other  person  to  any  corporate  office  on  the  day  or  within  the 
time  appointed  for  any  such  election  under  the  provisions  of  the  said  act 
of  the  fifth  and  sixth  years  of  the  reign  of  his  present  Majesty  for  regu- 
lating corporations,  or  of  this  act ;  and  the  said  Court  of  King's  Bench  is 
hereby  empowered  in  all  such  cases  to  award  a  mandamus,  and  cause 
such  proceedings  to  be  had  thereupon,  and  to  make  such  orders,  and  to  do 
all  other  acts,  matters  and  things  in  respect  thereof,  as  fully  and  effec- 
tually as  the  said  Court  is  now  by  law  authorized  in  any  other  cases 
of  mandamus  for  the  election  of  any  officers  of  corporations ;  and  the 
election  to  be  held  under  such  mandamus  shall  be  held  and  the  pro- 
ceedings thereon  conducted  within  the  borough  in  the  same  manner  and 
under  the  like  regulations  and  provisions  as  are  in  the  said  act  of  his  Ma- 
jesty King  Greorge  the  First  enacted  and  provided. 


6  &  7  Vict.  o.  G7. 

An  Act  to  enahle  Parties  to  sue  out  and  prosecute  Writs  of  Error  in  cer- 
tain cases  upon  the  proceedings  on  Writs  of  Mandamus. 

[22nd  August,  1843. 

Whereas  writs  of  mandamus  are  issued  by  her  Majesty's  Court  of 
Queen's  Bench  and  the  Courts  of  the  Counties  Palatine,  and  the  applica- 
tion for  the  same  must  now  be  made  in  those  Courts  respectively  alone  : 
And  whereas  writs  of  mandamus  are  frequently  awarded,  and  often  in 
cases  of  considerable  importance,  and  the  practice  of  issuing  such  torits 
hath  of  late  very  much  increased :  And  whereas  it  is  expedient  that 
parties  interested  in  the  issuing  of  or  in  the  proceedings  upon  such  writs 
respectively  shall  be  enabled  in  certain  cases  to  have  the  judgments  and 
decisions  of  the  said  Court  of  Quern's  Bench,  and  Courts  of  the  Counties 
Palatine  respectively,  in  respect  of  the  said  writs  and  of  the  proceedings 
thereon,  reviewed  l>y  a  Court  of  Error,  if  they  shall  so  think  fit,  and  that 
a  certain  mode  of  effecting  the  same  shall  be  ordained  and  established : 
And  whereas  by  a  certain  act  made  and  passed  in  the  ninth  year  of  the 
reign  of  Queen  Anne,  intituled  ''An  Act  for  rendering  the  proceedings 
upon  Writs  of  Mandamus  and  Informations  in  the  nature  of  a  Quo  War- 
ranto more  speedy  and  effectual,  and  for  the  more  easy  trying  and  deter- 
mining   the    rights    of    Offices    and    Franchises    in    Corporations    and 


488  tapping's    mandamus. 

Boroughs," (a)  it  was  enacted,  amongst  other  things,  that  in  certain  cases 
therein  mentioned,  when  a  writ  of  mandamus  should  issue  and  a  return 
should  he  made  thereunto,  it  should  be  lawful  for  the  person  suing  or  pro- 
secuting such  writ  to  plead  to,  or  traverse,  all  or  any  of  the  material  facts 
contained  within  the  said  return,  to  which  the  person  making  such  return 
should  reply,  take  issue,  or  demur,  and  such  further  proceedings  in  such 
manner  should  be  had  therein  for  the  determination  thereof,  as  might 
have  been  had  if  the  person  suing  such  writ  had  hrought  his  action 
L  J  on  the  case  for  a  false  return  :  And  whereas  by  an  *act  passed 
in  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  the  late  King  William  the  Fourth,(7j)  the 
said  provision  hereinbefore  mentioned  of  the  said  herein  first-recited  act 
was  extended  to  writs  of  mandamus  in  all  other  cases,  and  to  the  pro- 
ceedings thereon  :  And  whereas  in  neither  of  the  said  recited  acts,  nor 
in  any  other  act,  is  any  power  or  authority  given  to  the  person  prosecuting 
such  writ  of  mandamus  to  demur  to  the  return  made  to  any  such  writ,  so 
that  the  decision  of  the  said  Courts  respectively  as  to  the  validity  of  such 
return  could  he  reviewed  hy  a  Court  of  Error  ;  for  remedy  whereof  it  is 
enacted,  That  in  all  cases  in  which  the  person  prosecuting  any  such 
writ  heretofore  issued  or  hereafter  to  be  issued  shall  wish  or  intend  to 
object  to  the  validity  of  any  return  already  made  or  hereafter  to  be  made 
to  the  same,  he  shall  do  so  by  way  of  demurrer  to  the  same,  in  such  and 
the  like  manner  as  is  now  practised  and  used  in  the  Courts  hereinbefore 
mentioned  respectively  in  personal  actions  ;  and  thereupon  the  said  writ 
and  return  and  the  said  demurrer  shall  be  entered  upon  record  in  the  said 
Courts  respectively,  and  such  and  the  like  further  proceedings  shall  be 
thereupon  had  and  taken  as  upon  a  demurrer  to  pleadings  in  personal 
actions  in  the  said  Courts  respectively ;  and  the  said  Courts  respectively 
shall  thereupon  adjudge  either  that  the  said  return  is  valid  in  law,  or  that 
it  is  not  valid  in  law,  or  that  the  writ  of  mandamus  is  not  valid  in  law; 
and  if  they  adjudge  that  the  said  writ  is  valid  in  law,  but  that  the  return 
thereto  is  not  valid  in  law,  then  and  in  every  such  case  they  shall  also  by 
their  said  judgment  award  that  a  peremptory  (c)  mandamus  shall  issue  in 
that  behalf,  and  thereupon  such  peremptory  writ  of  mandamus  may  be 
sued  out  and  issued  accordingly,  at  any  time  after  four  days  from  the 
signing  of  the  said  judgment;  and  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  said  Courts 
respectively,  and  they  are  hereby  required,  in  and  by  their  said  judgment 
to  award  costs  to  be  paid  to  the  party  in  whose  favour  they  shall  thereby 
decide  by  the  other  party  or  parties. 

II.  And  that  whenever  any  such  judgment  as  is  hereinbefore  mentioned 
shall  be  given,  or  whenever  issue  in  fact  or  in  law  shall  be  joined  upon 
any  pleadings  in  pursuance  of  the  said  recited  acts  or  cither  of  them,  and 
judgment  shall  be  given  thereon  by  any  of  the  Courts  aforesaid,  it  shall 
be  lawful  for  any  party  to  the  record  in  any  of  such  cases,  who  shall 

(a)  For  this  act,  see  ante,  p.  439.  (b)  For  this  act,  see  ante,  p.  446. 

(c)  Lord  Denman,  C.  J.,  in  The  Queen  v.  Earl  of  Dartmouth,  5  Q.  B.  881,  said 
that  the  word  "  peremptory"  is  an  unfortunate  word  in  the  act. 


APPENDIX. 


489 


tliink  himself  aggrieved  by  such  judgment,  to  sue  out  and  prosecute  a  writ 
of  error  for  the  purpose  of  reversing  the  same,  in  such  manner  and  to 
such  Court  or  Courts  as  a  party  to  any  personal  action  in  the  said  Court 
may  now  sue  out  and  prosecute  a  writ  of  error  upon  the  judgment  in  such 
action ;  and  such  and  the  like  proceedings  shall  thereupon  be  had  and 
taken,  and  such  costs  awarded,  as  in  ordinary  cases  of  writs  of  error  upon 
judgments  of  the  said  Courts  respectively  in  personal  actions  ;  and  if  the 
judgment  of  such  Court  be  reversed  by  the  Court  of  Error,  the  said  Court 
of  Error  shall  thereupon  by  their  judgment  not  only  reverse  the  same,  but 
shall  also  in  addition  thereto  give  the  same  judgment  which  the  Court 
whose  judgment  is  so  reversed  ought  to  have  given  in  that  behalf;  and  if 
by  their  said  judgment  they  shall  award  that  a  peremptory  writ  of  man- 
damus shall  issue,  the  same  shall  and  may  accordingly  be  issued  by  the 
proper  officer  in  the  office  from  tvJiich  such  writs  issue,  as  the  case  may  be, 
upon  production  to  him  of  an  office  copy  of  the  said  judgment  of  the 
Court  of  Error,  which  shall  be  his  authority  and  warrant  for  so  doing : 
Provided  always,  that  bail  in  error  to  the  amount  of  fifty  pounds,  or  such 
other  sum  as  may  by  any  rule  of  practice  be  appointed  as  hereinafter  pro- 
vided, shall  be  duly  put  in  within  four  days  after  the  allowance  of  the 
said  writ  of  error,  and  the  same  shall  afterwards  be  duly  perfected  p^^g-. 
according  to  the  practice  of  *the  Court  wherein  the  said  original  L 
judgment  was  given,  otherwise  the  plaintifi"  in  error  shall  be  deemed  to 
have  abandoned  his  writ  of  error,  and  the  same  shall  not  be  further  pro- 
secuted. 

III.  That  no  action,  suit,  or  any  other  proceeding  shall  be  commenced 
or  prosecuted  against  any  person  or  persons  whatsoever  for  or  by  reason 
of  any  thing  done  in  obedience  to  any  peremptory  writ  of  mandamus 
issued  by  any  Court  having  authority  to  issue  writs  of  mandamus. 

IV.  That  the  said  Courts  of  Error  who  are  hereby  empowered  to  take 
cognizance  of  the  matters  aforesaid  may  make,  and  they  are  hereby  direct- 
ed to  make,  from  time  to  time  and  as  often  as  they  shall  see  occasion, 
such  rules  of  practice  in  reference  to  the  said  application  and  the  proceed- 
ings thereon,  and  in  reference  to  the  writs  of  error  hereinbefore  mentioned 
and  the  proceedings  thereon,  and  the  amount  of  bail  to  be  taken,  as  the 
said  Courts  respectively  may  deem  necessary  to  effectuate  the  intention  of 
this  act  in  relation  to  the  same  respectively. 


6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89. 

An  Act  to  amend  an  Act  for  the  Regulation  of  Municipal  Corporations 
in  England  and  Wales.{a)  [24th  August,  1843. 

Sect.  5,  after  reciting  that  it  is  expedient  to  render  certain  proceedings 

(a)  Only  so  much  of  this  act  is  given  as  has  relation  to  the  subject  "Man- 
damus." 


490  tapping's    mandamus. 

by  way  of  manJamus,  so  far  as  they  affect  corporate  offices  in  boroughs, 
more  summary  and  expeditious,  it  is  enacted.  That  from  and  after  the 
passing  of  this  act,  in  all  cases  of  intended  application  to  the  Court  of 
Queen's  Bench  for  a  mandamus  to  proceed  to  an  election  of  any  corporate 
officer  or  officers  in  any  of  the  boroughs  in  that  act  mentioned,  it  shall  be 
lawful  for  the  party  intending  to  make  such  application  to  give  notice  in 
writing  thereof  to  the  party  to  be  affected  thereby  at  any  time  not  less 
than  ton  days  before  the  day  in  the  said  notice  specified  for  making  such 
application,  in  which  notice  shall  be  set  forth  the  name  and  description  of 
the  party  by  whom  such  application  will  be  made,  together  with  a  state- 
ment of  the  grounds  thereof,  and  at  the  same  time  to  deliver  with  such 
notice  a  copy  of  the  affidavits  whereby  the  application  will  be  supported ; 
and  thereupon  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  said  last  mentioned  party  to  shew 
cause  in  the  first  instance  against  such  application,  and  if  no  sufficient 
cause  be  shewn,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  the  said  Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  on 
proof  of  the  due  service  of  such  notice  and  statement  and  of  the  delivery 
of  a  copy  of  such  affidavits  as  may  be  used  for  the  purpose  of  supporting 
such  application,  to  make  the  rule  for  such  mandamus  absolute,  if  the 
said  Court  shall  think  fit,  in  the  first  instance,  and  also,  if  they  shall  think 
fit,  to  direct  that  any  writ  of  mandamus  thereby  ordered  to  be  used  shall 
be  peremptory  in  the  first  instance,  (i) 


[*454]  ^APPENDIX 

OF    THE 

IRISH   STATUTES 


RELATING    TO    THE 


HIGH  PKEROGATIVE  WRIT  OF  MANDAMUS. 


The  writ  of  mandamiis  as  it  obtains  in  Ireland,  is  as  to  its  formula3, 
made  by  statute  identical  with  that  writ,  as  dispensed  in  England,  the 
words  of  the  statutes  being  oftentimes  verbatim  the  same.  Thus  the 
provisions  of  the  Irish  statute  19  Geo.  2,  c.  12,  will  be  found  to  be  the 
same  as  those  of  the  stats.  9  Ann.  c.  20,  and  11  Geo.  1,  c.  4.  Again, 
the  Irish  statute  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  contains  the  aggregate  provisions 

(b)  3  Steph.  Con.  685,  n.  (q). 


APPENDIX.  491 

of  tlie  Engllsli  statutes,  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  58,  and  6  &  7 
Vict.  c.  67,  so  that  it  may  with  accuracy  be  said,  that  the  formulae  of  the 
writ  in  both  portions  of  the  United  Kingdom  are  governed  by  the  same 
statutory  enactments. 


19  Geo.  2,  c.  12.(a) 
An  Act  for  the  letter  Regulating  Corporations.       [A.  D.  1745. 

Whereas  divers  persons  have  of  late  illegally  intruded  themselves 
into,  and  have  taken  upon  themselves  to  execute  the  offices  of  mayors, 
bailiifs,  portreeves  and  other  offices  within  cities,  towns  corporate,  boroughs 
and  places  within  this  kingdom,  and  where  such  offices  were  annual  offices, 
it  has  been  found  very  difficult,  if  not  impracticable  by  the  laws  now  in 
being,  to  bring  to  a  trial  and  determination  the  right  of  such  persons  to 
the  said  offices  within  the  compass  of  the  year,  and  where  such  offices 
were  not  annual  offices,  it  has  been  found  difficult  to  try  and  determine 
the  right  of  such  persons  to  such  offices,  before  they  have  done  divers  acts 
in  their  said  offices  prejudicial  to  the  peace,  order,  and  good  government 
within  such  cities,  towns  corporate,  boroughs,  and  places  wherein  they 
have  respectively  acted,  and  whereas  divers  persons  who  had  a  right  to 
such  offices,  or  to  be  burgesses,  or  freemen  of  such  cities,  towns  corporate, 
boroughs  or  places,  have  either  been  illegally  turned  out  of  the  same,  or 
have  been  refused  to  be  admitted  thereto,  having  in  many  of  the  said  cases 
no  other  remedy  to  procure  themselves  to  be  respectively  admitted  or  res- 
tored to  their  said  offices  or  franchises,  of  being  burgesses  or  freemen,  than 
by  writs  of  mandamus,  the  proceedings  on  which  are  dilatory  and  r*455-j 
expensive,  whereby  great  ^mischiefs  have  already  ensued,  and 
more  are  likely  to  ensue,  if  not  timely  prevented. 

And  whereas  in  many  cities,  boroughs,  and  towns  corporate  within  this 
kingdom,  the  election  of  the  mayor,  bailiff  or  bailiffs,  or  other  chief  officer 
or  officers,  is  by  charter  or  ancient  usage  confined  to  a  particular  day  or 
time  without  any  provision  how  to  act  or  proceed  in  case  no  election  be 
then  made,  and  it  frequently  happens,  that  by  such  charter  or  usage,  par- 
ticular acts  are  required  to  be  done  at  certain  times  in  order  to  and  for 
the  completing  of  such  elections,  and  by  the  contrivance  or  default  of  the 
person  or  persons  who  ought  to  hold  the  Court  or  preside  in  the  assembly 
where  such  elections  are  to  be  made  or  such  acts  to  be  done,  or  by  acci- 
dent, it  has  sometimes  happened,  and  may  frequently  do  so  if  not  timely 
prevented,  that  no  Courts  or  assemblies  have  been  held,  or  elections  made, 
or  such  acts  done  within  the  time  fixed  for  that  purpose ;  in  which  cases 
if  elections  of  such  offices  could  not  afterwards  be  made  or  completed,  or 
if  in  consequence  of  such  omission  the  corporation  should  be  dissolved, 

{a)  Only  so  much  of  this  act  is  given  as  relates  to  the  subject,  "  Jlandamus." 


492  tapping's    mandamus. 

great  mischiefs  might  ensue ;  for  remedy  and  prevention,  whereof  it  is 
enacted,  that  from  and  after  the  first  day  of  Trinity  Term  in  the  year  of 
our  Lord  one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  forty-six,  where  any  writ  of 
mandamus  shall  issue  out  of  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  in  this  kingdom 
in  any  of  the  cases  aforesaid,  such  person  or  persons,  who  by  the  laws  of 
this  realm  are  required  to  make  a  return  to  such  writ  of  mandamus,  shall 
make  his  or  their  return  to  the  first  icrit  of  mandamiis. 

Sect.  2.  And  that  from  and  after  the  said  first  day  of  Trinity  Term,  as 
often  as  in  any  of  the  cases  aforesaid  any  %crit  of  mandamus  shall  issue 
out  of  the  Court  of  King's  Bench,  and  a  return  shall  be  made  thereunto, 
it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  to  and  for  the  person  or  persons  suing  or  pro- 
secuting such  writ  of  mandamus  to  plead  to  or  traverse  all  or  any  of  the 
material  facts  contained  within  the  said  return,  to  which  the  person  or 
persons  making  such  return  shall  reply,  take  issue  or  demur,  and  such 
further  proceedings,  and  in  such  manner  shall  be  had  therein  for  the  deter- 
mination thereof  as  might  have  been  had  if  the  person  or  persons  suing 
such  writ  had  brought  his  or  their  action  on  the  case  for  a  false  return, 
and  if  any  issue  shall  be  joined  in  such  proceeding,  the  person  or  persons 
suing  such  writ  shall  and  may  try  the  same  in  such  place,  as  an  issue 
joined  in  such  action  on  the  case  should  or  might  have  been  tried,  and  in 
case  a  verdict  shall  be  found  for  the  person  or  persons  suing  such  writ,  or 
judgment  given  for  him  or  them  upon  a  demurrer,  or  by  nil  dicit,  or  for 
want  of  a  replication  or  other  pleading  he  or  they  shall  recover  his  or  their 
damages  and  costs  in  such  manner,  as  he  or  they  might  have  done  in  such 
action  on  the  case  as  aforesaid,  such  costs  and  damages  to  be  levied  by 
capias  ad  satisfaciendum,  fieri  facias  or  elegit;  and  a  peremptory  icrit  of 
mandamus  shall  be  granted  without  delay  for  him  or  them  for  whom 
judgment  shall  be  given,  as  might  have  been  if  such  return  had  been 
adjudged  insufficient,  and  in  case  judgment  shall  be  given  for  the  person 
or  persons  making  such  return  to  such  writ,  he  or  they  shall  recover  his 
or  their  costs  of  suit,  to  be  levied  in  manner  aforesaid. 

Sect.  3.  Provided  always,  that  if  any  damages  shall  be  recovered  by 
virtue  of  this  act  against  such  person  or  persons  making  such  return  to 
such  writ  as  aforesaid,  he  or  they  shall  not  be  liable  to  be  sued  in  any 
other  action  or  suit  for  the  making  such  return,  any  law,  usage  or  custom 
to  the  contrary  thereof  in  anywise  notwithstanding. 

Sect.  6.  And  that  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  to  and  for  the  said  Court 
of  King's  Bench  to  allow  to  such  person  or  persons  respectively  to  whom 
any  writ  of  mandamus  shall  be  directed,  or  to  the  person  or  persons  who 
shall  sue  or  prosecute  the  same,  such  convenient  time  respectively  to  make 
a  return,  plead,  reply,  rejoin,  or  demur  as  to  the  said  Court  shall  seem 
just  and  reasonable,  anything  herein  contained  to  the  contrary  thereof  in 
anywise  notwithstanding. 

Sect.  7.  And  that  if  in  any  city,  borough,  or  town  corporate,  within 

this  kingdom,  no  election  shall  be  made  of  the  mayor,  bailifiPor 

L         -J  bailiffs,  *or  other  chief  officer  or  officers  of  such  city,  borough,  or 


APPENDIX.  493 

town  corporate,  upon  tLe  day  or  within  the  time  appointed  by  charter  or 
ancient  usage,  or  by  the  rules,  orders,  and  directions  made  and  established 
by  the  lord  lieutenant  and  council  of  this  kingdom,  for  the  better  regu- 
lating of  corporations  pursuant  to  the  act  of  the  seventeenth  year  of  his 
late  Majesty  King  Charles  the  Second  for  such  elections,  or  such  elec- 
tions being  made  shall  afterwards  become  void,  whether  such  omission  or 
avoidance  shall  happen  through  the  default  of  the  oflBcer  or  officers,  who 
ought  to  hold  the  Court,  or  preside  where  such  election  is  to  be  made,  or 
by  any  accident  or  other  means  whatsoever,  the  corporation  shall  not  thereby 
be  deemed  or  taken  to  be  dissolved,  or  disabled  from  electing  such  officer 
or  officers  for  the  future,  but  in  any  case  where  no  election  shall  be  made 
as  aforesaid,  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  for  the  members  or  persons  of 
such  city,  borough,  or  corporation  who  have  a  right  to  vote  or  be  present 
at  or  to  do  any  other  act  necessary  to  be  done  in  order  to  or  for  the  com- 
pleting of  such  election,  and  they  or  such  of  them  as  shall  not  be  hindered 
by  any  reasonable  impediment  or  excuse  are  hereby  required  respectively 
to  meet  and  assemble  together  in  the  Town  Hall,  or  other  usual  place  of 
meeting  for  making  such  election  within  such  city,  borough,  or  town  cor- 
porate, upon  the  day  next  after  the  expiration  of  the  time  within  which 
such  election  ought  to  have  been  made  unless  such  day  shall  happen  to 
be  a  Sunday,  and  then  upon  the  Monday  following  between  the  hours  of 
ten  in  the  morning,  and  two  in  the  afternoon  of  the  same  day,  and  that 
the  members  or  persons  having  a  right  to  vote  at,  or  to  do  any  other  act 
necessary  to  be  done  in  order  to  such  election,  or  such  of  them  as  shall  be 
so  assembled  or  met  together,  shall  forthwith  proceed  to  the  election  of  a 
mayor,  bailiff  or  bailiffs  or  other  chief  officer  or  officers  for  such  city, 
borough,  or  corporation,  and  to  do  every  act  necessary  to  be  done  in  order 
to  or  for  the  completing  of  such  election,  in  such  manner  as  was  usual  in, 
or  in  order  to,  the  election  of  such  officer  or  officers  upon  the  day  or  within 
the  time  appointed  by  charter  or  usage,  or  by  the  rules,  orders,  and  direc- 
tions aforesaid  for  such  election,  and  in  case  upon  such  day  of  meeting 
hereby  appointed  for  such  election,  the  mayor,  bailiff  or  bailiffs,  or  other  pro- 
per officer  or  officers,  who  ought  to  have  held  the  Court,  or  presided  at  tbe 
assembly  for  such  election,  or  doing  any  other  act  necessary  to  be  done  in 
order  to  such  election,  if  the  same  had  been  made  or  done  on  the  day  fixed, 
or  within  the  time  limited  by  charter  or  usage,  or  by  the  rules,  orders, 
and  directions  of  the  lord  lieutenant  and  council  aforesaid  for  that  pur- 
pose, shall  be  absent  then  such  other  person  having  a  right  to  vote  being 
the  nearest  then  present  in  place  or  office  to  the  person  or  persons  so 
absenting  himself  or  themselves,  shall  hold  the  Court,  or  preside  in  the 
meeting  or  assembly  hereby  appointed,  and  shall  have  the  same  power 
and  authority  in  all  respects  therein,  as  belongs  to  the  mayor,  bailiff  or 
bailiffs,  or  other  chief  officer  or  officers  of  the  same  city,  borough,  or  town 
corporate,  at  any  Court  or  assembly  for  the  election  of  officers  for  such 
place,  or  for  doing  any  other  act  necessary  to  be  done  in  order  to  such 
election. 


494  tapping's    mandamus. 

Sect.  8.  And  tliat  if  it  shall  happen,  that  in  any  city,  horongh,  or  town 
corporate  Avithin  this  kingdom  no  election  shall  be  made  of  the  mayor, 
bailiff  or  bailiffs,  or  other  chief  ofl&cer  or  officers  of  such  city,  borough,  or 
town  corporate,  upon  the  day  or  within  the  time  appointed  by  charter  or 
usage,  or  by  the  rules,  orders,  and  directions  of  the  lord  lieutenant  and 
council  aforesaid,  for  that  purpose,  and  that  no  election  of  such  officer  or 
officers  shall  be  made  pursuant  to  the  directions  hereinbefore  prescribed, 
or  such  election  being  made,  shall  afterwards  become  void  as  aforesaid,  in 
every  such  case  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  for  his  jMajcsty's  Court  of 
King's  Bench  upon  motion  to  be  made  in  the  said  Court  to  award  a  writ 
or  writs  of  mandamus,  requiring  the  members  or  persons  of  such  city, 
borough,  or  town  corporate,  having  a  right  to  vote  at  or  to  do  any  other 
act  necessary  to  be  done  in  order  to  such  election,  respectively  to 
L         J  assemble  themselves  upon  a  day  *and  at  a  time  to  be  prefixed  in 
such  writ  or  writs,  and  to  proceed  to  the  election  of  a  mayor,  bailiff,  or 
bailiffs,  or  other  chief  officer  or  officers  as  the  case  shall  require,  and  to  do 
every  act  necessary  to  be  done  in  order  to  such  election  or  to  signify  to 
the  said  Court  good  cause  to  the  contrary,  and  thereupon  to  cause  such 
proceedings  to  be  had  and  made,  as  in  other  cases  of  mandamus  granted 
by  the  said  Court,  of  election  of  officers  of  corporations,  and  of  the  day 
and  time  appointed  in  and  by  any  such  writ  or  writs  of  mandamus  for 
holding  such  assembly,  public  notice  in  writing  shall  by  such  person  as 
the  said  Court  shall  appoint,  be  fixed  in  the  market  place,  or  some  other 
public  place  within  such  city,  borough,  or  town  corporate,  by  the  space  of 
six  days  before  the  day  so  appointed,  and  such  officer  or  other  person 
respectively  shall  preside  in  such  assembly,  as  ought  to  have  presided  at 
the  election  of  such  mayor,  bailiff  or  bailiffs,  or  other  chief  officer  or  officers, 
or  at  the  doing  of  any  other  act  necessary  to  be  done  in  order  to  such 
election,  in  case  the  same  had  been  made  or  done  upon  the  day  herein 
before  prescribed  for  that  purpose. 

Sect.  15.  And  that  where  any  writ  of  mmidamus  shall  issue  out  of 
the  Court  of  King's  Bench  in  any  of  the  cases  aforesaid,  the  person  or 
persons  to  whom  such  writ  shall  be  directed,  shall  make  his  or  their 
return  to  the  first  writ  of  mandamus. 

Sect.  16.  And  that  after  the  said  first  day  of  Trinity  Term  an  act 
made  in  the  sixth  year  of  the  reign  of  her  late  Majesty  queen  Anne, 
intituled  "  An  Act  for  the  Amendment  of  the  Law  and  better  Advance- 
ment of  Justice,"  and  all  the  statutes  of  jeofails  shall  be  extended  to  all 
writs  of  mandamus  and  proceedings  thereon,  for  any  of  the  matters  in 
this  Act  mentioned. 


APPENDIX.  495 


1  Wm.  4,  c.  21. 


An  Act  to  Improve  the  Proceedings  tit  Proldhitlon,  and  on  Writs  of 
3Iandamus.{a)  [30th  March,  1831. 


1  Wm.  4,  c.  58. 

An  Act  to  enahle  Courts  of  Law  to  give  ReVuf  against  Adverse  Claims 
made  upon  persons  having  no  Interest  in  the  subject  of  such  CIaims.{h) 

[20th  October,  1831. 


*9  &  10  YiCT.  c.  113.  [*458] 

An  Act  to  improve  the  Proceedings  in  Prohibition  and  on  Writs  of  3Ian- 
damus  in  Ireland.(c)  [28th  August,  184G. 

Whereas  by  an  act  passed  in  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  his  late 
Majesty  King  Williaiu  the  Fourth,  intituled  "An  Act  to  improve  the 
Proceedings  in  Prohibition  and  on  Writs  of  Mandamus,"  certain  provi- 
sions were  made  relating  to  applications  for  writs  of  prohibition,  and  to 
the  proceedings  thereon,  and  to  damages  and  costs  of  such  applications 
and  proceedings ;  and  it  is  expedient  that  the  said  provisions  should  be 
extended  to  and  be  in  force  in  Ireland :  It  is  enacted,  that  the  several 
enactments  contained  in  the  said  statute  relating  to  applications  for  writs 
of  prohibition,  and  to  declarations  and  other  pleadings  and  proceedings 
thereon,  and  to  the  recovery  of  costs  and  damages  therein,  shall  be  and 
the  same  are  hereby  extended  to  and  shall  be  in  force  in  Ireland. 

II.  And  whereas  the  provisions  contained  in  an  act  passed  in  the  Par- 
liament of  Ireland  in  the  nineteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  his  late  Majesty 
King  G-eorge  the  Second,  intituled  "  An  Act  for  the  better  Kegulation  of 
Corporations,"  relating  to  the  writs  of  mandamus,  therein  mentioned, 
have  been  found  useful  and  convenient,  and  the  same  ought  to  be  ex- 
tended to  the  proceedings  on  other  such  writs ;  it  is  enacted.  That  the 

(a)  This  act  (set  forth,  ante,  p.  44G,)  although  in  terms  applicable  to  England 
only,  has  been  by  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  1  (I.),  (set  forth,  post,  p.  458),  ex- 
pressly extended  to  Ireland. 

\b)  This  act  (set  forth,  ante,  p.  448,  and  n.  {a)),  although  in  terms  applicable  to 
England  only,  has  been  by  stat.  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113,  s.  1  (I.),  (set  forth,  post,  p. 
458,)  expressly  extended  to  Ireland. 

The  provisions  of  the  above  act,  1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  58,  are  made  applicable  to 
cases  of  mandamus  by  the  previous  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4  (ante,  p.  446.) 

(c)  This  act,  although  it  makes  certain  acts  of  Parliament  relative  to  England 
applicable  also  to  Ireland,  yet  it  is  silent  as  to  the  act  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  ante,  p. 
453. 


496  tapping's    mandamus. 

several  enactments  contained  in  tbe  said  last-mentioned  statute  relating  to 
the  returns  to  writs  of  mandamus,  and  the  proceedings  on  such  returns, 
and  to  the  recovery  of  damages  and  costs,  shall  be  and  the  same  are  hereby 
extended  and  made  applicable  to  all  other  writs  of  mandamus,  and  the 
proceedings  thereon,  except  so  far  only  as  the  same  may  be  varied  or 
altered  by  this  act. 

III.  And  whereas  writs  of  mandamus,  other  than  such  as  relate  to  the 
offices  and  franchises  mentioned  in  or  provided  for  by  the  said  act  made 
in  the  nineteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  King  George  the  Second,  are 
sometimes  issued  to  officers  and  other  persons,  commanding  them  to  admit 
to  offices  or  do  or  pei-form  other  matters  in  respect  whereof  the  persons 
to  whom  such  writs  are  directed  claim  no  right  or  interest,  or  whose  func- 
tions are  merely  ministerial  in  relation  to  such  offices  or  matters ;  and  it 
may  be  proper  that  such  officers  and  persons  should  in  certain  cases  be 
protected  against  the  payment  of  damages  or  costs  to  which  they  may 
otherwise  become  liable ;  be  it  therefore  enacted.  That  it  shall  be  lawful 
for  the  Court  in  Ireland  to  which  application  may  be  made  for  any  writ 
of  mandamus  (other  than  such  as  relate  to  the  said  offices  and  franchises 
mentioned  in  or  provided  for  by  the  said  act  made  in  the  reign  of  King 
George  the  Second,)  if  such  Court  shall  see  fit  so  to  do,  to  make  rules 
and  orders  calling  not  only  upon  the  person  to  whom  such  writ  may  be 
required  to  issue,  but  also  all  and  every  other  person  having  or  claiming 
any  right  or  interest  in  or  to  the  matter  of  such  writ,  to  show  cause 
against  the  issuing  of  such  writ,  and  payment  of  costs  of  the  application; 
and  upon  the  appearance  of  such  other  person  in  compliance  with  such 
rules,  or  in  default  of  appearance  after  service  thereof,  to  exercise  all  such 
powers  and  authorities,  and  make  all  such  rules  and  orders  applicable  to 
the  case,  as  are  or  may  be  given  or  mentioned  by  or  in  any  act  passed  or 
to  be  passed  during  this  present  session  of  Parliament  for  giving  relief 
against  adverse  claims  made  upon  persons  having  no  interest  in  the  sub- 
ject of  such  claims :  Provided  always,  that  the  return  to  be  made  to  any 
such  writ,  and  issues  joined  in  fact  or  in  law  upon  any  traverse  thereof, 
^,  _Q,  or  upon  any  demurrer,  shall  be  *made  and  joined  by  and  in  the 
'•  name  of  the  person  to  whom  such  writ  shall  be  directed;  but 

nevertheless  the  same  shall  and  may,  if  the  Court  shall  think  fit  so  to 
direct,  be  expressed  to  be  made  and  joined  on  the  behalf  of  such  other 
person  as  may  be  mentioned  in  such  rules,  and  in  that  case  such  other 
person  shall  be  permitted  to  frame  the  return,  and  to  conduct  the  subse- 
quent proceedings  at  his  own  expense;  and  in  such  case,  if  any  judgment 
shall  be  given  for  or  against  the  party  suing  such  writ,  such  judgment 
shall  be  given  against  or  for  the  person  or  persons  on  whose  behalf  the 
return  shall  be  expressed  to  be  made,  and  who  shall  have  the  like  remedy 
for  the  recovery  of  costs  and  enforcing  the  judgment  as  the  person  to 
whom  the  writ  shall  have  been  directed  might  and  would  otherwise  have 
had. 


APPENDIX.  497 

IV.  That  in  case  the  return  to  any  such  writ  shall  in  pursuance  of 
the  authority  given  by  this  act,  be  expressed  to  be  made  on  behalf  of  any 
other  person  as  aforesaid,  the  further  proceedings  on  such  writ  shall  not 
abate  or  be  discontinued  by  the  death  or  resignation  of  or  removal  from 
ofloice  of  the  person  having  made  such  return,  but  the  same  shall  and  may 
be  continued  and  carried  on  in  the  name  of  such  person ;  and  if  a  peremp- 
tory writ  shall  be  awarded  the  same  shall  and  may  be  directed  to  any  suc- 
cessor in  office  or  right  to  such  person. 

V.  And  for  making  some  further  provisions  for  the  payment  of  cost.s 
on  application  for  mandamus,  be  it  enacted,  That  in  all  cases  of  applica- 
tions for  any  writ  of  mandamus  whatsoever  in  Ireland  the  costs  of  such 
application  whether  the  writ  shall  be  granted  or  refused,  and  also  the  costs 
of  the  writ,  if  the  same  shall  be  issued  and  obeyed,  shall  be  in  the  discre- 
tion of  the  Court,  and  the  Court  is  hereby  authorized  to  order  and  direct 
by  whom  and  to  whom  the  same  shall  be  paid. 

VI.  And  whereas  it  is  expedient  that  parties  interested  in  the  issuing  of 
or  in  the  proceedings  upon  writs  of  mandamus  shall  be  enabled  in  certain 
cases  to  have  the  judgments  and  decisions  of  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench 
in  Ireland  in  respect  of  the  said  writs,  and  of  the  proceedings  thereon, 
reviewed  by  a  Court  of  Error,  if  they  shall  so  think  fit,  and  that  a  certain 
mode  of  effecting  the  same  shall  be  ordained  and  established ;  and  where- 
as there  is  not  any  power  or  authority  given  by  the  said  recited  act  of  the 
reign  of  his  Majesty  King  George  the  Second  to  the  person  prosecuting  a 
writ  of  mandamus  to  demur  to  the  return  made  to  any  such  writ,  so  that 
the  decision  of  the  said  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  as  to  the  validity  of  such 
return  could  be  reviewed  by  a  Court  of  Error ;  for  remedy  whereof,  there- 
fore, be  it  enacted.  That  in  all  cases  in  which  the  person  prosecuting  any 
writ  of  mandamus  heretofore  issued  or  hereafter  to  be  issued  shall  wish  or 
intend  to  object  to  the  validity  of  any  return  heretofore  made  or  hereafter 
to  be  made  to  the  same,  he  shall  do  so  by  way  of  demurrer  to  the  same, 
in  such  and  the  like  manner  as  is  now  practised  and  used  in  the  said 
Court  in  "personal  actions,  and  thereupon  the  said  writ  and  return  and 
the  said  demurrer  shall  be  entered  on  record  in  the  said  Court,  and  such 
and  the  like  further  proceedings  shall  be  thereupon  had  and  taken  as  upon 
a  demurrer  to  pleadings  in  personal  actions  in  the  said  Court ;  and  the 
said  Court  shall  thereupon  adjudge  either  that  the  said  return  is  valid  in 
law,  or  that  it  is  not  valid  in  law,  or  that  the  writ  of  mandamus  is  not 
valid  in  law ;  and  if  the  Court  adjudge  that  the  said  writ  is  valid  in  law, 
but  that  the  return  thereto  is  not  valid  in  law,  then  and  in  every  such 
case  the  Court  shall  also  by  the  said  judgment  award  that  a  peremptory 
mandamus  shall  issue  in  that  behalf;  and  thereupon  such  peremptory 
writ  of  mandamus  may  be  sued  out  and  issued  accordingly  at  any  time 
after  four  days  from  the  signing  of  the  said  judgment;  and  it  shall  be 
lawful  for  the  said  Court  and  they  are  hereby  required,  in  and  by  their 
said  judgment,  to  award  costs  to  be  paid  to  the  party  in  whose  favour  they 
shall  thereby  decide,  by  the  other  party  or  parties. 

June,  18,52.-32 


498  tapping's    mandamus. 

VII.  And  be  it  enacted,  That  whenever  any  such  judgment  as  is  here- 
inbefore '•'mentioned  shall  be  given,  or  vrhenever  issue  in  fact  or  in 
L  -■  law,  shall  be  joined  upon  any  pleadings,  in  pursuance  of  the  said 
recited  act  of  the  reign  of  his  Majesty  King  George  the  Second  and  of 
this  act,  or  of  cither  of  them,  and  judgment  shall  be  given  thereon  by  the 
said  Court,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  any  party  to  the  record  in  any  of  such 
eases  who  shall  think  himself  aggrieved  by  such  judgment  to  sue  out  and 
prosecute  a  writ  of  error  for  the  purpose  of  reversing  the  same,  in  such 
manner  and  to  such  Court  or  Courts  as  a  party  to  any  personal  action  in 
the  said  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  in  Ireland  may  now  sue  out  and  prosecute 
a.  writ  of  error,  upon  the  judgment  in  such  action,  and  such  and  the  like  pro- 
ceeding shall  thereupon  be  had  and  taken,  and  such  costs  awarded,  as  in  or- 
dinary eases  of  writs  of  error  upon  judgments  of  the  said  Court  in  personal 
actions ;  and  if  the  judgment  of  the  said  Court  be  reversed  by  the  Court  of 
Error  the  said  Court  of  Error  shall  thereupon,  by  their  judgment,  not  only 
reverse  the  same,  but  shall  also,  in  addition  thereto,  give  the  same  judgment 
which  the  Court  whose  judgment  is  so  reversed  ought  to  have  given  in  that 
behalf;  and  if  by  their  said  judgment  they  shall  award  that  a  peremptory 
writ  of  mandamus  shall  issue,  the  same  shall  and  may  accordingly  be 
issued  by  the  proper  officer  in  the  office  from  which  such  writs  issue,  upon 
production  to  him  of  an  office  copy  of  the  said  judgment  of  the  Court  of 
Error  which  shall  be  his  authority  and  warrant  for  so  doing ;  Provided 
always  that  bail  in  error  to  the  amount  of  fifty  pounds,  or  such  other  sum 
as  may  by  any  rule  of  practice  be  appointed  as  hereinafter  provided,  shall 
be  duly  put  in  within  four  days  after  the  allowance  of  the  said  writ  of 
error,  and  the  same  shall  afterwards  be  duly  perfected  according  to  the 
practice  of  the  Court  wherein  the  said  original  judgment  was  given,  other- 
wise the  plaintiff  in  error  shall  be  deemed  to  have  abandoned  his  writ  of 
error  and  the  same  shall  not  be  further  prosecuted. 
.  VIII.  And  that  no  action,  suit,  or  any  other  proceeding  shall  be  com- 
menced or  prosecuted  in  Ireland  against  any  person  or  persons  whatsoever 
for  or  by  reason  of  anything  done  in  obedience  to  any  peremptory  writ  of 
mandamus  issued  by  any  Court  having  authority  to  issue  writs  of  man- 
damus. 

IX.  And  that  the  said  Court  or  Courts  of  Error  which  are  hereby  em- 
powered to  take  cognizance  of  the  matters  aforesaid  may  make  and  they 
are  hereby  directed  to  make,  from  time  to  time  and  as  often  as  they  shall 
see  occasion,  such  rules  of  practice  in  reference  to  the  said  application  and 
the  proceedings  thereon,  and  in  reference  to  the  writs  of  error  hereinbefore 
mentioned,  and  the  proceedings  thereon,  and  the  amount  of  bail  to  be  taken, 
as  the  said  Courts  respectively  may  deem  necessary  to  effectuate  the  in- 
tention of  this  act  in  relation  to  the  same  respectively. 

X.  And  be  it  enacted.  That  this  act  may  be  amended  or  repealed  by 
any  act  to  be  passed  in  this  present  scssiou  of  Parliament. 


APPENDIX.  499 


*IIULES,  ORDERS,  AND  REGULATIONS,  [*461] 

Made  hy  the  Court  of  B.  R.  in  pursuance  of  Stat.  6  Vict.  c.  20,  for  the 
government  of  the  Practice  of  the  Crown  side  of  such  Court  in  Eng- 
land.(^a) 

1.  Masters  to  have  Custody  of  Records. — The  Queen's  coroner  and 
attorney,  and  Master  on  the  Crown  side,  shall  have  the  care  and  custody 
of  the  records  and  other  proceedings  on  the  Crown  side  of  the  said  Court. 

2.  Lsuiufj  Writs. — Every  writ  issued  on  the  Crown  side  of  the  Court 
shall  be  prepared  and  engrossed  by  the  attorney  or  party  suing  out  the 
same,  and  the  name  and  address  of  such  attorney  or  party  suing  out  the 
same  shall  be  indorsed  thereon  j  and  every  such  writ  shall,  before  the 
issuing  thereof,  be  sealed  with  a  stamp  to  be  provided  for  that  purpose, 
and  kept  at  the  Crown  Office,  and  an  entry  of  every  such  writ,  together 
with  the  name  and  address  of  the  attorney  or  party  issuing  the  same,  shall 
"be  made  in  a  book  to  be  kept  at  the  Crown  Office  for  that  purpose. 

3.  Teste  and  Return  of  Writs. — Every  writ  of  subpoena  shall  be  tested 
as  of  the  day  on  which  it  is  actually  issued. 

4.  Attachment. — Every  writ  of  attachment  of  contempt  shall  be  tested 
and  made  returnable  on  a  day  certain  in  Term  before  the  Queen  at  West- 
minster. 

6.  Venire  Facias  Juratores. — Every  writ  of  venire  facias  juratores 
shall  be  tested  as  of  the  day  on  which  issue  is  joined,  or  if  there  be  a  con- 
tinuance, on  the  day  of  the  last  continuance,  previous  to  the  award  of  the 
distringas  juratores,  and  shall  be  made  returnable  on  a  day  certain,  or 
immediately,  before  the  Queen  at  Westminster,  either  in  the  same,  or  next 
Term,  as  occasion  may  require. 

7.  Distringas. — Every  writ  of  distringas  juratores  shall  be  tested  as  of 
the  day  of  the  return  of  the  venire  facias  juratores,  and  shall  be  made 
returnable  on  a  day  certain  in  the  next  ensuing  Term  before  the  Queen  at 
Westminster. 

8.  Mandamus. — Every  writ  of  mandamus  shall  be  tested  and  made 
returnable  on  a  day  certain  before  the  Queen  at  Westminster,  and  there 
shall  be  eight  days  at  least  between  the  teste  and  return  of  every  such 
writ  of  mandamus,  where  the  act  required  to  be  done  is  in  London,  or 
within  forty  miles  thereof,  and  fourteen  days  in  all  other  cases. 

10.  Tr/-/i!s  of  Execution. — Every  writ  of  execution  may  be  tested  as  of 
the  day  on  which  it  actually  issues,  and  may  be  made  returnable  either 
on  a  day  certain  in  Term,  or  immediately  after  the  execution  thereof;  and 
the  party  suing  forth  the  same  shall  indorse  thereon  the  place  of  abode, 
and  addition  of  the  party  against  whom  the  same  is  issued,  or  such  other 

(a)  Only  such  of  the  rules,  &c.,  are  here  given  as  have  relation  to  the  subject  of 
Mandamus. 


500  tapping's    mandamus. 

other  description  of  him  as  such  party  suing  out  such  writ  may  be  able  to 

give. 

11.  Filin(/  Writs  when  returned. — Every  writ  issued  on  the  Crown  side 
of  the  Court,  and  returnable  in  the  said  Coutr,  or  before  a  Judge  thereof, 
shall,  together  with  the  return  made  thereto,  be  filed  according  to  the 
oxif^cncy  of  such  writs  respectively,  on  or  before  the  return  thereof;  and 
such  writs  as  are  made  returnable  before  a  Judge,  together  with  the  return 
r*4fi91  ^^^^  thereto,  and  the  Judge's  order  (if  any)  *made  thereon,  or  a 
'^  copy  thereof,  shall  be  transmitted  to  the  Crown  Ofl&ce  by  the  clerk 
of  such  Judge,  and  filed  there  as  soon  as  the  Judge  shall  have  made  such 
order,  or  exercised  his  discretion  thereon. 

13.  Side  Bar  Rule  to  return  Writs. — A  side  bar  rule  to  return  a  writ 
on  the  Crown  side,  may  be  obtained  according  to  former  practice  without 
any  actual  motion  for  the  same,  which  shall  require  such  return  to  be 
made  within  four  days  next  after  service  of  such  rule,  if  served  in  London 
or  Middlesex,  and  within  eight  days  in  all  other  cases. 

14.  No  Motion  to  file  a  Writ. — It  shall  not  henceforth  be  necessary  to 
make  any  motion  to  file  any  writ  or  other  proceeding  returned  into  the 
said  Court,  but  the  same  shall  be  filed  at  the  Crown  Office  without  any 
rule  first  granted  for  that  purpose. 

15.  Copies  of  Proceedings,  dr.,  how  oLtained. — Copies  of  mandamus, 
and  return  and  traverse,  or  other  pleadings  thereupon,  and  every  other 
proceeding  filed  on  the  Crown  side  of  the  said  Coiirt,  shall,  when  required, 
be  made  at  the  Crown  Ofiice,  and  delivered  to  the  respective  parties,  or 
other  persons  requiring  the  same. 

17.  Rule  to  plead — one  only  to  he  rjiccn. — One  side  bar  rule  to  plead 
only  shall  henceforth  be  given  in  all  cases  on  the  Crown  side,  (and  it 
shall  not  be  necessary  to  give  any  peremptory  rule) ;  such  rule  shall  be 
drawn  up  and  served  as  well  in  Term  as  in  Vacation,  and  shall  expire  in 
ten  days  next  after  service  thereof. 

18.  Rules  to  reply,  d&c— One  side  bar  rule  only  to  reply,  rejoin,  join 
in  demurrer  or  in  error,  shall  henceforth  be  given,  which  shall  be  drawn 
up  and  served,  (and  no  peremptory  rule  given  thereon) ;  and  such  last- 
mentioned  rules  shall  in  all  cases  expire  in  four  days  next  after  service 
thereof. 

19.  Judgment  hy  Defaidt. — In  case  no  plea,  replication,  rejoinder, 
joinder  in  demurrer,  joinder  in  error,  or  other  pleading,  shall  be  entered 

.  on  the  expiration  of  the  time  limited  by  such  rule,  judgment  as  for  want 
of  such  pleading  may  be  signed  at  the  opening  of  the  ofiice  on  the  next 
following  morning,  unless  any  order  of  the  Court  or  Judge  extending  such 
time  shall  have  been  obtained  and  served,  and  in  such  case  judgment 
shall  not  be  signed,  until  the  day  after  the  expiration  of  the  time  granted 
by  such  order. 

20.  Judgment  on  Verdict. — In  all  cases  of  judgment  required  to  be 
signed  on  verdicts  given  at  Nisi  Prius,  the  postea  shall  be  produced  at 
the  Crown  Office,  and  judgment  shall  in  four  days  next  after  the  return 


APPENDIX.  501 

of  tlie  distringas,  or  at  any  subsequent  time,  be  marked  thereon  by  one  of 
the  Masters,  or  the  assistant  Master,  unless  a  rule  shall  have  been  obtain- 
ed for  a  new  trial,  or  to  enter  judgment  non  obstante  veredicto,  or  to  arrest 
judgment  in  cases  where  such  rules  may  by  the  practice  of  the  Court  be 
obtained. 

21.  No  Rule  for  Jadjment. — It  shall  not  henceforth  be  necessary  to 
give  any  rule  for  judgment. 

22.  Proceedings  on  Orders  of  Sessions  removed. — la  all  cases  of  orders 
removed  into  this  Court  for  any  inferior  jurisdiction,  the  same  shall  be 
put  into  the  Crown  paper  for  argument,  upon  a  rule  to  shew  cause  why 
such  order  should  not  be  quashed.  In  all  other  cases,  the  conviction  or 
other  proceedings  intended  to  be  argued,  shall  be  put  into  the  Court  paper 
on  a  rule  for  a  concilium;  which  rule  shall  specify  the  day  on  which  the 
case  will  be  put  into  the  paper  for  argument,  and  shall  be  drawn  up  and 
served  six  days  at  least  before  such  day  within  forty  miles  from  London, 
and  eight  days  in  all  other  cases. 

23.  Paper  Books. — In  all  cases  entered  for  argument  in  the  Crown 
paper,  the  prosecutor,  or  his  attorney,  shall  deliver  a  paper  book  of  the 
proceedings  to  each  of  the  two  senior  Judges  of  the  Court,  and  the  defen- 
dant, or  his  attorney,  shall  in  like  manner  make  and  deliver  a  paper  book 
to  the  third  and  fourth  Judges  of  the  said  Court  respectively,  two  days 
before  the  day  on  which  the  case  will  be  put  in  the  paper  for  argument ; 
and  such  several  paper  books  shall  in  all  cases  *(except  where  a  r>ic4pq-i 
special  case  is  reserved  for  the  opinion  of  the  Court)  contain  in  the 
margin  thereof,  or  appended  thereto,  and  to  be  delivered  therewith,  the 
points  intended  to  be  argued,  but  shall  not  contain  any  other  observation 
or  matter  than  such  points  for  argument,  together  with  copies  of  the  pro- 
ceedings, and  a  copy  of  the  rule  nisi  to  quash,  or  for  a  concilium ;  and 
judgment  shall  be  given  by  the  Court  against  the  party  neglecting  to 
deliver  paper  books  to  the  Judges,  or  delivering  the  same  without  the 
poiats  for  argument,  if  the  Court  shall  so  please. 


£. 

s. 

d. 

0 

5 

0 

0 

0 

6 

0 

5 

0 

0 

2 

6 

0 

5 

0 

0 

5 

0 

0 

5 

a 

502  tapping's    mandamus. 


TABLE   OF  FEES. 

Estahh'shed  and  ordained  hy  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  and  Judijes  of  Her 
Majesty's  Court  of  B.  R.,  to  he  taken  hereafter  hy  the  Queen's  Coroner 
and  Attorney  and  Master,  on  the  Crown  side  of  the  said  Court  pursu- 
ant  to  Stat.  6  Vict.  c.  20.  (a) 


Copy  of  any  proceeding,  when  required,  not  more  than  ten 
sheets    ......... 

K  more,  per  sheet  ....... 

Writ  Fees. 

For  every  attachment  ...... 

subpoena  to  testify  .... 

attachment  of  contempt         .... 

venire  facias  juratores 

distringas  juratores       ..... 

capias   and  distringas  ad   satisfaciendum,  "\ 

elegit,  fi.  fa.,  lev.  fa.,  or  other  writ  after  >       0     5     0 
judgment     .  .         .  .  ,         .   ) 

mandamus  .  .  .  .  .  .050 

Filing  every  affidavit,  or  other  proceeding        .         .         .  0     10 

Certificate  of  the  finding  or  filing  of  any  proceeding     .         .050 
Attendance  on  subpoena  for  expenses       .         .         .         .  110 

at  assizes,  expenses  only  .         .         .         .000 

before  Houses  of  Lords  and  Commons,  and  other  ) 
committees  for  expenses  .         .         .  ) 

Search  (each  time)  .......  010 

Special  Jury  (nominating)  .         .         .         .         .         .110 

Administering  oaths  in  Court 0     2     0 

Taxing  every  bill  of  costs  less  than  three  folios  .         .010 

If  more,  per  sheet  .         .         .         .         .         .  0     0     4 

'r  Affidavits  and  rules,  search  for  (per  Term)         .  .         .004 

X  Delivering  out  under  Judge's  order  for  production  at  as- 1 
(.     sizes,  &c.         ........       j 

Putting  case  in  the  Crown  paper  for  argument      .         .         .010 
Rules. 

For  every  rule  to  plead,  reply,  &c.,  or  return  a  writ  0     10 

For  every  other  rule        .         .         .         .         .         .  0     2     0 

If  exceeding  seventy-two  words,  for  each  eighteen  words      0     0     3 
Copies  of  rules  half  the  charge  for  the  original. 

(a)  Only  so  many  of  the  fees  are  here  inserted  as  related  to  the  subject,  "Man- 
damus." 


110 


INDEX. 


The  pages  referred  to  are  those  between  brackets  [  ], 

A. 

ABATEMENT  OF  WRIT,  generally,  410,  411. 

under  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  5,  411. 
ABBOTT,  lies  not  for,  29,  30. 
ABSENTEEISM,  return  of,  40,  196. 

form  of  return,  40 — see  tits.  Desertion.     Non- Residence. 
ABSOLUTION,  lies  for,  30,  49— see  tit.  Bishop. 
ACCOUNTS,  30,  13.5. 

ACT  OF  PARLIAMENT,  lies  to  execute  provisions  of,  11,  28,  30,  32,  265. 
the  Court  will  clearly  see  its  jurisdiction,  11,  30. 
application,  32. 
who  should  apply,  289. 

lies,  although  no  specific  person  named  to  enfoice  the  provision,  32 — see 
tit.  Jurisdiction. 
ACTION,  a  remedy  by  is  a  bar,  20,  23,  53. 
as  action  on  the  case,  20. 
special  assumpsit,  20. 
debt,  20. 
trover,  21. 
detinue,  21. 
ejectment,  21. 
fees,  action  for,  21. 

withholding,  21 — see  tit.  Rule. 
ADxMINISTRATION,  LETTERS  OF,  when,  or  not,  granted  for,  32,  83,  34. 
lies  to  seal  to  letters,  Sic.  34. 
against  whom  granted,  33. 
writ — form  of  mandatory  clause,  33,  34. 
application,  who  entitled  ex  debito  justitice,  33. 

when  denied,  34,35. 
durante  minori  ajtate,  when  granted  for  letters,  35. 
cum  testamentoannexo,  when  granted  for  letters,  35. 
Returns. 

lis  pendens,  35. 
administration  committed,  35. 
various  returns,  35,  36. 
Bond. 

lies  for  production,  36. 
application,  36. 
ADMIRALTY  (^Court  of),  36,  106. 

(Lords),  3b. 
ADMISSUS  NON  FUIT,  return  of,  194. 


504  TAPriNO'S     MANDAMUS. 

ADVOCATE  OF  DOCTORS'  COMMONS,  lies  not  to  admit,  36— see  tit. 

Inn  of  Court. 
AFFIDAVITS,  of  demand,  285. 

of  refusal,  286. 

in  support  of  application — see  tit.  Application. 

for  renewing',  what  necessary,  295. 

of  service  and  notice  of  rule,  when  to  be  made,  300. 

as  to  enlarging  rule,  301. 

as  to  shewing  cause,  301,  et  seq. 

as  to  rule  absolute,  303,  306. 

for  cross  writs,  332  n. 

for  supersedeas,  335. 

when  required  in  mandamus  cases,  292,  413. 

how  entitled,  413. 

body  of  affidavit,  what  sufficient,  413. 

as  to  misrepesentation,  414. 

supplemental  affidavits,  29-5,  414. 

jurat — form  of,  414. 

filing,  when  necessary,  306,  415. 

amendment  of,  415. 

costs  of,  415. 

in  support  of  motion  for  costs,  420. 

of  attachment,  423. 

of  information,  for  false  return,  433. 
AFFILIATION,  37. 
ALDERMAN,  when  granted  for,  37. 

lies  to  elect,  37. 

lies  to  return  election,  37. 
application,  37. 
rule,  37. 

service,  37. 

lies  to  return  and  admit,  38. 

lies  to  admit,  38. 

lies  to  swear,  38. 

lies  to  present,  38. 

lies  to  enforce  duty,  38. 

lies  to  remove,  when,  38. 

lies  to  restore,  38,  39. 
returns,  39,  40. 

form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  310  n. 
ALEHOUSE,  lies  not  to  license,  40,  41 — see  tit.  License. 
A  LET  ASTER,  swearing  in,  when  granted  for,  41. 
ALIMONY,  when  granted  for,  41 — see  tit.  Baron  and  Feme. 
ALIAS  WRIT— see  tit.  Writ  of  Mandamus. 
ALLEGIANCE  OATH,  when  granted  for,  41,  151— see  tit.  Oath. 
ALMS,  writ  for,  41 — see  tits.  Blue  Coat  School.     Charity.     Charter  House 

Sc^iool. 
ALPHABETICAL  SERIES  of  the  subjects  as  to  which  the  writ  has  been 

either  granted  or  denied,  9,  29 — 281. 
AMENDMENT  OF  WRIT,  when  allowed,  334. 

at  trial,  390— see  tit.  Trial. 

of  affidavits — see  tit.  Affidavits. 

of  return,  368. 
AMERCEMENT,  remedy  by  bar  to  writ,  21,  120. 

AMICABLE  ASSURANCE  COMPANY,  when  granted  to  swear  in  direc- 
tor, 41. 
AMOTION  BY  CORPORATION  COMMISSIONERS,  return  of,  39. 
AMOTUS  NON  FUIT,  return  of,  194. 
ANSWER  IN  CHANCERY,  when  granted  to  seal,  42. 


INDEX.  505 

ANTIQUITY  OF  WRIT,  1,  2,  n.  (/),  251  n.  263  n.  438  n. 
APPARITOR  GENERAL,  when  granted  for  office  of,  42. 

when  to  enforce  duty,  42. 
APPEAL,  lies  to  hear  appeal,  14,  41,  42,  78,  122,  137,  231,  232,  233,  234. 

but  not  if  there  be  another  remedy,  21,  '23.''). 
APPLICATION  FOR  RULE  FOR  WRIT,  proceedings  previously  to,  282. 

demand  and  refusal,  162,  163,  282 — as  to  demand  and  refusal,  see  those 
titles. 

notice  of  application,  where  necessary,  183,  287,  298,  407. 
where  not,  287. 

nature  of,  5, 287. 

under  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  6. 

when  applicant  entitled,  or  not,  ex  debito  justitiae,  287,  288. 

right  to  writ  must  be  both  legal  and  equitable,  9,  27,  2:^,29. 

must  be  clearly  substantiated,  28,  29,  250,  251. 

all  legal  requirements  must  be  fulfilled,  29,  294. 

by  whom  made,  288,  289. 

against  whom  to  be  made,  29,  290. 

as  against  corporate  bodies,  290. 

as  against  the  Crown — see  tits.  Crown.     Customs.     Manor  Royal. 

when  to  be  made,  184,  290,  291. 

must  not  be  premature,  290. 

must  be  within  reasonable  time,  290,  291. 

when  granted  immedintely  on  default,  &c.  290. 

when  dismissed,  291,  292. 

costs,  291. 

affidavits  in  support,  when  necessary,  292. 

what  they  should  contain,  292,  293,  294,  413,  415. 

grounds  of  application,  293,  294. 

renewing  application,  294,  295. 
APPOINTMENT  TO  OFFICE,  lies  for,  63,  70,  89,  205. 
APPORTIONMENT  OF  MONEY,  lies  for,  when,  121,  222,  223. 

lies  to  pay,  210 — see  tit.  Money. 
APPRAISEMENT,  return  of,  34,  279. 
APPRENTICE,  when  it  lies  for,  42. 

to  receive  an  apprentice,  when,  42. 

lies  to  admit  to  freedom  of  company,  42,  125. 

lies  to  enrol  and  enter  apprenticeship  deeds,  125. 

as  to  pauper  apprentices,  42,  219,  220. 
APPROVAL  FOR  OFFICES,  lies  not  for,  14,  15,  144,  145. 
APPROVED  MEN  OF  GUILDFORD,  when  granted  for,  42. 
APPROVER  OF  GUNS,  42. 
APPUNCTUATUS  NON  FUIT,  return  of,  194. 
ARBITRATION,  may  be  had  in  mandamus  cases,  412. 
ARBITRATOR,  when  granted  for,  42— see  tit.  Umpire. 
ARCHDEACON,  lies  to  admit,  42. 

return  of,  not  having  taken  oath  of  canonical  obedience,  42. 
non  fuit  electus,  42. 

lies  to  restore,  42. 

as  to  office  of  archdeacon's  registrar — see  tit.  Registrar. 
ARMOURERS  AND  BRAZIERS,  43,  126. 

lies  to  swear  in  to  office  of  freeman  of,  126. 
ARTICLES  OF  PEACE,  4.3,  214. 
ASHBURTON,  EIGHT  MEN  OF,  writ  to  restore,  43. 

to  swear  in,  43. 

form  of  writ,  43,  319,  320. 
ASSESSORS,  43. 

ASSIZE,  remedy  by,  formerly  a  bar  to  writ,  19,  20,  60,  172. 
ASSIZES  {Nisi  Prius),  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  310. 
[Crown  Court),  310,  311. 


506  tapping's    mandamus. 

ATTACHMENT,  nature  of,  421. 

when  granted,  6,  8,  344,  352,  366,  422,  423. 
how  obtained,  423. 
motion  for,  423. 
rule  nisi,  423. 
shewing  cause,  423,  424. 
affidavits,  423. 
form  of  writ,  424. 
how  tested,  424. 
as  to  e.xecution,  424. 
defendants,  423. 
ATTORNEY,  lies  for,  43. 
lies  to  practise,  43. 

when  granted,  44. 
lies  to  admit,  44. 
lies  to  restore,  44. 

return  of,  speaking  contemptuous  words  of  Judge,  45,  268. 
Rolls,  45,  161-164 — see  tit.  Barnard's  Inn. 
AUDITOR    OF    CHAMBERLAIN'S     AND     BRIDGEMASTER'S     AC- 
COUNTS, admission  to  office  of,  45. 
AUDITOR  OF  CHURCHWARDENS'  ACCOUNTS,  45. 
AUDITOR  OF  OVERSEERS'  ACCOUNTS,  45. 
AUDITOR  OF  PARISH  ACCOUNTS,  45,  209. 

lies  for  election  of,  74,  203. 
AUGMENTED  CURACY,  45— see  tit.  Curacy. 
AUTHORITY,  lies  for  loss  of,  227. 
AUTRE  FOIS  ACQUIT,  45,  see  tit.  Courts  Inferior. 
AVERMENTS,  in  writ, 

when  necessary,  309,  319. 
consequence  of  failure  of,  309. 
of  jurisdiction  of  Court,  319. 
of  prosecutor's  title,  320. 

rules  as  to,  321. 
of  defendant's  duty,  322. 
of  demand  and  refusal,  323. 
of  absence  of  specific  legal  remedy,  323. 
omission  in  consequence  of,  328. 
of  return,  must  be  certain,  353 — see  tit.  Return. 
AWARD,  enforcing  by  company,  45. 


B. 


BAILIFF  OF  BOROUGH,  lies  for,  45. 

lies  to  elect,  45. 

lies  to  hold  Court  for  that  purpose,  46. 

application  under  stat.  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89,  46. 

lies  to  admit  and  swear,  46. 

lies  to  restore,  46. 
BAILIFF  OF  MANOR,  46— see  tit.  Manor. 
BANK  OF  ENGLAND,  lies  not  for  transfer  of  stock,  20,  46. 

lies  not  for  production  of  accounts,  46. 
BANKRUPT,  lies  for  further  examination,  46. 

lies  not  to  grant  certificate,  47. 
BANNITUS,  lies  not  to  restore,  2,269. 
BARNARD'S  INN,  attorney  of,  47. 

lies  not  to  admit  to,  44. 
BARON,  Court,  47. 
BARON  AND  FEME,  47. 


INDEX.  507 

BARRISTER-AT-LAW,  47. 
BASTARDS,  lies  to  justices  as  to,  47. 
lies  to  hear  appeal  as  to,  47,  48. 
lies  for  costs  of  maintenance  of,  48. 
lies  to  enforce  order  of  affiliation,  48. 
lies  not  to  convict  for  deserting-,  48. 
BEDFORD  LEVEL,  lies  to  restore  receiver  of,  48. 

collector,  48. 
lies  to  admit  and  swear  registrar  of,  48. 
BELLS,  lies  not  to  set  up  church  bells,  22. 
BERMUDAS  COMPANY,  lies  to  restore  to,  49. 
BERWICK-UPON-TWEED,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  SIL 
BILL  OF  EXCEPTIONS,  applicable  to  trial  of,  412. 
BIRTHS,  registrar  of,  49. 
BISHOP,  49. 

application  against,  49. 
costs  4Q 
BLACKSMITHS'  COMPANY,  lies  for  delivery  of  books  of,  49. 
BLUE  COAT  SCHOOL,  lies  not  to  restore  scholar  of,  49. 
BOND,  49. 

payment  of  money  due  on  bond,  writ  lies  not  for,  11 — see  tits.   Adminis- 
tration.    Constables,  High  (Bond). 
BOOKS,  &c.,  lies  for  delivery  of,  49,  50. 
rule,  form  of,  49,  n.  (rr). 
writ,  form  of,  50. 
lies  for  deposit  of,  50 — see  tits.  Blacksmiths^  Company.    Borough  {Books). 
Company  (Books).     County  (Accounts,  Books,  Sfc.) 
BOROUGH,  50. 

as  to  officers  of,  see  tit.  Office. 
lies  for  payment  out  of  borough  fund,  50,  51. 
lies  to  make  borough  rate,  51. 
lies  to  hear  appeal  against  borough  rate,  51. 
lies  to  compel  payment  of  borough  rate,  51,  52. 
lies  for  inspection  or  delivery  of  borough  rate-books,  .52. 
BOROUGH  COMPTER,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
BOROUGH  CORPORATION,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
BOROUGH  COURT,  52. 

BOROUGH  GAOL,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
BOWLING  GREEN,  52. 
BRIBERY,  return  of,  196. 
BRIDEWELL,  lies  to  restore  governor  of,  52. 
BRIDGE,  52. 

BRIDGE  HOUSE  ESTATES,  lies  to  restore  clerk  of,  52,  53. 
BRIDGEMASTER'S  ACCOUNTS,  lies  to  admit  auditor  of,  45,  53— see  tit. 

Auditor  of  Chamberlain' s,  tjc  Accounts. 
BRISTOL,  lies  for  steward  of  Sheriffs'  Court  of,  53. 

lies  to  restore  steward  of  Tolzey  Court  of,  53 — see  tits.  Courts  Inferior 
(Sheriffs  Court,)  (Tolzey  Court.) 
BUILDING  ACT,  lies  not  to  reinstate  decorations  of  a  party  wall  pulled 
down  under  Building  Act,  20,  53 — see  tits.  Act  of  Parliament.     Con- 
vicliofi 
BURGESS,  lies  for,  53,  54. 
lies  to  elect,  54. 

application,  54. 
lies  to  admit,  54. 
lies  to  swear  in,  55. 
lies  to  enrol,  55. 
lies  to  restore,  55. 

returns,  55.         ^ 


508  tapping's    mandamus. 

BURGESS  (CAPITAL,)  election,  55,  61. 
lies  to  admit,  11. 
lies  to  swear  in,  56. 
application,  56. 
rule,  56,  803. 
lies  to  restore,  56. 
lies  to  remove,  when,  11,  56. 

(CHIEF,)  lies  to  elect,  56,  64. 

(COMMON,)  lies  to  restore,  57. 

(FREE,)  lies  to  elect,  57. 

lies  to  admit,  57. 
lies  to  swear  in,  57. 

(INN  BURGESS  OF  WIGAN,)  lies  to  restore,  57. 

(PRINCIPAL,)  lies  to  elect,  57. 

ROLL,  insertion  of  name,  57,  450. 

inspection,  &c.  58. 
restoration  of  name,  58,  450. 
application,  58,  450. 
writ,  59. 
return,  59,  450. 
costs,  59,  450. 
assessors'  election,  59 — see  tits.  Assessors. 
BURIAL,  lies  to  compel,  when,  22,  59,  60,  65 — see  tit.  Corpse. 
BUTCHERS'  COMPANY,  lies  to  restore  clerk,  60. 
BYE-LAWS,  60,  96. 

C. 

CALLS,  60. 

CANAL  COMPANY,  lies  to  command  it  to  enrol  contracts,  &,c.  60. 

to  maintain  their  canal,  60 — see  tit.  Railway. 

to  establish  uniform  tolls,  60 — see  tit.  Compensation  (Company.) 
CANON,  to  admit  to  a  canonry,  61 — see  lit.  Railway. 

to  institute  indirect  and  invest  therein,  61. 

lies  notio  choose  a  supernumerary  canon,  61. 

lies  not  to  restore,  61. 
CANONS  RESIDENTIARY,  lies  to  elect, 61. 

lies  to  elect  a  canon  to  be  dean,  61. 
CANTERBURY,  COURT  OF,  61,  106. 

lies  to  restore  attorney  of,  44. 
CAPITAL  BURGESS,  61. 

CITIZEN,  61,  74. 

CARRIERS,  lies  to  hear  appeal  against  conviction  of,  61 — see  tit.  Railway 
{Goods.)  -^ 

CASE,  62. 

the  grantinfr  of  a  case  at  sessions  is  a  bar  to  writ,  21,  219,  235. 
CASUS  OMISSUS,  lies  not  to  supply,  31,  64. 
CATHEDRAL  STALL,  lies  to  admit  to,  61. 

lies  not  for  profits  of;  20. 
CENTRAL  CRIMINAL  COURT,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
CERTIFICATE,  lies  for  grant  of,  62. 

of  obedience  to  peremptory  writ,  7,  408. 
CERTIORARI,  lies  not  to  review,  &c.  where  certiorari  taken  away,  62,  231. 

lies  to  amend  return  of,  62. 
CHAMBERLALN,  lies  for,  62. 

lies  to  elect,  62. 

lies  to  admit,  62 — see  tit.  Auditor. 
CHAMBERLAIN'S  ACCOUNTS,  AUDITOR  OF,  lies  to  admit,  45. 


INDEX.  509 

CHANCERY,  INN  OF,  62. 
CHAPEL,  lies  to  enrol  a  chapel,  62. 
CHAPELWARDENS,  lies  to  swear  in,  62. 

rule,  298. 
CHAPLAIN,  when  it  lies  to  appoint,  63 — see  tit.  Churchwardens. 
when  it  lies  to  admit,  63. 

lies  to  allow  him  to  perform  his  official  duty,  63. 
when  it  lies  to  license,  63. 
CHARITY,  when  it  lies  in  respect  of,  63,  140. 

lies   for   keys,  &c.    of  charity  chest,   61 — see  tits.     Blue  Coat  School. 
Charter  House  School. 
CHARTERS,  lies  to  compel  obedience  to,  11,  2^:^,  64 — sec  tit.  Jurisdiction. 
CHARTER  HOUSE  SCHOOL,  lies  not  to  restore  a  scholar  of,  64. 
CHATTELS,  lies  not  for  restitution  of,  11. 
CHESHIRE,  SHERIFF  OF,  form  of  direction  of  wftt  to,  311. 
CHESTER,  COURT  OF,  64,  106. 

lies  for  restoration  of  attorney  of,  45. 
CHIEF  BURGESS,  64. 
CHRISM,  has  been  granted  for,  49,  64. 
CINQUE  PORTS,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
CHURCH,  65. 

lies  for  keys  of,  65. 

lies  for  burial  6.5, 

lies  to  compel  church  trustees  to  act, 6.5. 

lies  not  to  make  church  rate,  12,  23,  65,  68. 

lies  to  make  rate  in  nature  of,  12,  66. 

returns  thereto,  67. 
lies  to  compel  payment  of  rate,  67. 
lies  to  command  making  of  rate  for  payment  of  loans,  67. 
returns  thereto,  68. 
CHURCH  BOOKS,  lies  not  for,  22. 
CHURCH  VESTMENTS,  lies  not  for,  22. 
CHURCHWARDEN,  68. 

when  it  lies  for  office  of,  68,  69. 
lies  to  elect,  69. 

lies  to  produce  rate  books  at  a  scrutiny  of  the  poll,  70 
lies  to  appoint,  70. 
affidavits,  70. 
lies  to  admit,  70. 

cross  mandamuses  will  be  granted,  70. 
lies  to  swear  in,  70. 

rule  for  writ,  73,  298. 
writ,  73,  325. 
returns  thereto,  69. 
lies  to  restore,  73. 
lies  to  allow  accounts,  74. 
lies  to  reimburse,  74. 
lies  not  to  make  rate  to  reimburse,  74. 
lies  to  allow  inspection  of  accounts,  16,  74. 

lies  to  hear  a  complaint  against  for  not  signing,  passing  and  deliver- 
ing accounts,  70 
lies  to  command  them  to  assemble   parishioners  in  order  to  elect 
churchwardens,  74. 
CITIZEN,  lies  to  admit,  74. 
lies  to  restore,  74. 
lies  to  restore  a  capital  citizen,  74. 
CITY— see  p,  71. 

CITY  WORKS,  CLERK  OF,  lies  for  office  of,  75. 
lies  to  restore,  75. 


610  tappinq's   mandamus. 

CLERK  OF  BUTCHERS'  COMPANY,  75. 
CLERK  OE  CITY  WORKS,  75. 

THE  CROWN,  75. 

CUSTUS  BREVIUM,  75. 

DEAN  AND  CHAPTER,  75. 

THE  FINES  LN  MARSHES  OF  WALES,  75. 

GUARDIANS  OF  POOR,  75,  129. 

JUSTICES,  75. 

LAND  TAX  COMMISSIONERS,  75. 

MASONS'  COMPANY,  75. 

PARISH,  75. 

PEACE,  76. 

PRIVATE  COMPANIES,  70. 

as  to  restoration  of,  84. 

lies  for  perfurmance  fif  official  duties,  81. 

TURNPIKE  TRUSTEES,  70. 

VESTRY,  70. 

VILL,  70. 

WATERS,  LONDON,  70. 


lies  not  for,  169. 
CLOTH  MAKERS'  COMPANY,  70. 
COALMETER,  lies  not  for,  169. 
COLCHESTER,  Corporation  Court  of,  7,  100. 

lies  to  swear  in  high  steward  of,  70. 

lies  to  restore  attorney  of,  44. 
COLLATERAL  SECURITY,  no  answer  to  writ,  68. 
COLLEGE,  70. 

lies  not  for  a  college  chaplain,  70 — see  tit.  Chaplain. 

as  to  election  of  fellows,  77,  441. 

when  it  lies  to  admit  a  fellow,  77,  441. 

lies  not  to  expel  a  fellow,  77. 

lies  to  hear  an  appeal  on  the  expulsion  of  a  fellow,  73. 

lies  not  to  restore  a  fellow,  78. 

where  it  lies  not  for  the  profits,  &c.  of  a  fellowship,  79. 

lies  to  admit  librarian,  79. 

lies  to  appoint,  elect,  admit,  swear  in  and  restore  master  of  college,  79, 

lies  not  to  admit  to  be  member  of  college,  79. 

lies  to  command  master  to  take  oaths  of  fellows  under  stat.  1  Wra,  &,  M. 
c.  8—80. 

lies  not  to  command  senior  fellow  to  be  president  thereof,  80. 

as  to  when  it  lies  for  provost,  80. 

lies  to  admit  to  a  scholarship,  80. 

lies  to  command  the  affixing  of  the  college  seal,  SO. 

lies  not  to  deprive  vice  master,  80. 

lies  not  for  matters  wilhin  the  visitatorial  jurisdiction,  SO,  81. 

form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  'All. 
COMMISSARY  OF  YORK,  fcTm  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
COMMISSIONER,  lies  to  certify  election  of  a  commissioner  under  an  act  of 
Parliament.  81 — see  tit.  Office. 

Y.Qi  to  swear  him  in,  81,  120. 

lie^  to  command  commissioners  under  act  of  Parliament  to  execute  their 
duties,  32,  120 — see  tit.  Duties. 
COMMISSIONERS  OF  POOR  LAW— see  tit.  Poor  Laxo  Commissioners. 
COMMISSIONS,  81— see  tit.  Militia. 
COMMON  BURGESS.  Hi. 

COUNCILMAN,  81. 

COMMONER,  election  of,  81. 

li"S  to  admit,  81. 

lies  to  restore,  81. 


INDEX.  511 

COMMON  LAW— see  tit.  Jurisdiction. 

COMMON  PLEAS  COURT,  8L 

COMPANY,  lies  for  reg-ulation  of  joint  stock  company,  82. 

as  to  compensation  by  company,  82. 

lies  to  swear  in  directors,  82,  82,  n.  (z). 

lies  for  performance  of  duties  of  company,  82,  29L 

lies  not  in  certain  casos  lo  command  enrolment  of  sliarcy,  82,  83. 

when  it  lies  to  enforce  payment  of  calls,  83. 

lies  in  certain  cases  to  command  a  company  to  satisfy  judgments  reco- 
vered, 83. 

lies  to  allow  a  proprietor  to  inspect  books,  papers,  &c.  83,  84. 

lies  for  delivery  of  books,  &c.  of  company,  84. 
COMPENSATION,  lies  to  command  a  company  to  compensate  for  land,  &,c. 
taken,  85. 

lies  to  assess  compensation,  85. 

lies  to  enter  up  judgment  for  compensation  money,  ,86. 

when  it  lies  fur  payment  of  compensation,  8G,  147. 

when  it  lies  for  payment  of  costs  of",  &G,  147,  148. 

lies  to  review  taxation  of,  8G. 

when  application  for  writ  to  be  made,  87. 

affidavits  in  support  thereof,  67. 

lies  to  assess  damajres  for  loss  of  municipal  ofTice,  87. 

lies  that  Lords  of  Treasury  should  hear  appeal,  87,  200. 

lies  to  execute  bond  to  secure  compensation,  88. 

lies  to  enforce  payment  of  borough  rates  to  pay  bond,  88. 

lies  for  compensation  under  Drainage  Acts,  if  no  other  remedj',  120. 

as  to  compensation  for  damages  done  by  rioters,  88. 

lies  for  compensation  to  sheriffs  under  stat.  55  Geo.  3,  c.  50 — 89. 
COMPLAL'^^T,  writ  to  compel  justices  to  hear,  41,  128,218,230. 
CONCURRENT  WRITS— see  Writ  of  Mandamus. 
CONDITION  PRECEDENT,  return  of,  68,  187. 

CONFESSION  AND  AVOIDANCE— see  tits.   Writs  of  Mandamus.     Re- 
turn.    Plea. 
CONFIRMATION,  lies  for,  89. 
CONSECRATION  OF  BISHOP,  89. 

lies  not  for,  49. 
CONSTABLE,  lies  for  ofTicc  of,  89. 

lies  to  admit,  89. 

lies  to  appoint,  89. 

lies  to  swear  in,  89. 

lies  to  restore,  89. 

lies  to  hear  appeal  against  allowance  of  accounts,  90. 

lies  not  to  command  payment  of  money  by,  90. 

lies  for  reimbursement  of,  99. 

when  it  lifis  for  reimbursement  by  high  constable,  90. 

lies   to   put   in   suit    condition   of  high    constable's    bond,    when,    17, 
90,  91. 
CONTRACT,  lies  not  to  command  a  public  board  to  execute  contract,  32, 
91. 

lies  to  command  overseers  to  pay  money  in  pursuance  of,  91. 
CONVICTION,  lies  to  hear  appeal  against,  41,  91,  302. 

lies  to  enforce  a  conviction,  91. 

lies  to  complete  record  of  a,  92. 
COPYHOLD  COURT,  92. 
CORONERS,  lies  for  office  of,  92. 

lies  to  elect,  92. 

lies  to  hold  an  inquest,  &c.  92. 

lies  to  piiy  coronoi's  i'ees,  &,c.  92,  93. 

form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 


512  tapping's    mandamus. 

CORPORATION,  MUNICIPAL,  lies  for  a  municipal  office,  26,  27. 
lies  to  enforce  duties  of,  93. 

form  of  writ,  324. 
lies  for  delivery,  &c.  of  municipal  insignia,  94. 
lies  for  inspection  of  municipal  books,  &.c.  94,  95. 
lies  to  affix  seal  to  any  document  to  which  it  should  be  affixed,  96. 
lies  to  act  in  pursuance  of  bye-laws,  90. 
lies  to  adnriit  to  a  franchise,  96. 
form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
CORPORATION,  TRADING,  lies  not  to  perform  duties,  &c.  97. 
lies  not  to  produce  accounts,  23,  97. 
lies  not  for  delivery  of  trading  mark,  97. 
CORPSE,  lies  to  deliver  up,  97. 
COSTS,  lies  to  pay  costs,  when,  97,  98. 
lies  to  issue  distress  for,  93. 

of  premature  application  for  rule  for  writ,  how  awarded,  291,  306. 
of  rule  absolute,  how  awarded,  306. 
as  to  cross  writs,  333. 
as  to  quashing,  339. 
as  to  demurrer  to  return,  3S0. 
of  trial,  394. 
of  special  case,  411. 
when  granted,  after  verdict  on  a  traverse  to  return  under  9  Ann.  c.  20,  s. 

1,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  3—41.5. 
as  to  ministerial  offices,  &c.,  in  cases  within  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4 — 415. 
as  to  demurrer  to  return  under  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  1 — 415. 
as  to  writ  of  error  under  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  2 — 415. 
general  rules  as  to  award  of  costs,  416,  417. 
when  defendant  entitled  to,  8. 
when  treble  costs  given,  417. 
against  whom,  418, 

corporation  municipal,  418. 

justices,  418. 

inhabitants,  418. 

officers,  &c.  419. 
how  obtained,  419. 
motion  for,  419. 

affidavits  in  support  of,  420. 
rule  nisi,  form  of,  421. 
security  for,  421, 
forma  pauperis,  421. 
taxation  of,  421. 

as  to  false  return — see  False  Return. 
execution  for,  8,  392. 
COUNCILLOR,  lies  for  office  of  common  councilman,  99, 
lies  to  elect,  99,  100. 
lies  for  inspection  of  voting  papers,  100. 
lies  to  admit,  100. 

returns,  100. 
lies  to  admit  and  swearing  in,  100, 

return,  100. 
lies  to  compel  performance,  duties,  &c.  101. 

return, 
lies  to  restore,  101. 

form  of  writ,  101. 

return,  101,  102. 
lies  not  to  remove,  102. 
COUNTY,  lies  to  deliver  up  Accounts,  Books,  &,c.  102. 
lies  to  inspect  accounts,  books,  &c.  102. 


INDEX.  513 

COUNTY— continued. 

lies  to  make  rate,  when,  103. 

lies  to  levy  proportion  of  rate,  103. 

lies  to  hear  appeal  against  rate,  103. 

lies  to  elect  county  treasurer,  103. 

lies  not  to  enforce  duties,  6lc.,  when,  98,  103,  104. 
COUNTY  COURT,  104,  106. 
COUNTY  GAOL,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
COUNTY  RATE,  104. 
COURT,  INN  OF,  104. 
COURTS,  when  the  writ  lies,  104, 105,  106. 

lies  to  hold  Courts,  108. 
returns,  109. 

lies  to  pay  obedience  to  tolt,  109. 

lies  to  receive  plaint,  109. 

lies  to  proceed  with  a  cause,  109. 

lies  to  hear  a  cause,  109,  230. 

lies  to  hear  appeal,  109 — see  tit.  Appeal. 

lies  to  state  a  case,  110 — see  tit.  Case. 

lies  to  rehear,  when,  110,  236. 

lies  not  for  a  new  trial,  110. 

lies  to  proceed  to  judgment,  when,  110,  111,  115. 

lies  not  to  review  a  judgment.  111. 

lies  to  make  up  a  record,  92,  111,  237 — 239. 

lies  to  correct  proceedings,  when,  11,  17,  105,  111,  112. 

lies  from  Chancery  to  Court  of  B.  R.,  112. 

lies  not  from  B.  R.  to  C.  B.,  112. 

as  to  mandamus  to  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council,  112. 

lies  not  for  officers  of  Courts,  when,  178,  228. 
COVENANTS,  return  of  breach  of,  125. 

CRIMINAL  INFORMATION  for  false  return— see  tit.  Return. 
CROSS  WRITS— see  tit.  Writ  of  Mandamus. 
CROWN,  lies  not  to  the  Crown,  112. 

lies  not  to  officers  of  Crown  as  such,  112,  115,  265. 
CURACY,  113. 
CURATE,  lies  for  office  of,  113. 

lies  to  admit  to  chapel,  113. 

lies  to  license,  113 — see  tit.  License. 

lies  to  restore  to  chapel,  when,  113,  114. 

lies  not  to  license  curate  of  augmented  curacy,  26,  114. 

lies  for  perpetual  curates,  114. 

lies  to  nominate  a  perpetual  curate  to  be  licensed,  114. 

lies  to  admit  to  perpetual  curacy,  114. 

lies  to  nominate  a  stipendiary  curate  for  license,  114. 
CUSTOM,  lies  to  present  manorial  custom,  115. 

lies  to  enforce  a  legal  custom,  115. 

return  of  custom  to  remove  at  pleasure,  39,  101,  175,  176,  264. 

return  of  custom,  115,  176. 
CUSTOMS,  lies  to  Commissioners  of  Customs  to  do  their  duties,  115. 
CUSTOS  BREVIUM,  lies  not  to  restore  clerk  of,  115,  116. 
CUSTOS  ROTULORUM,  116. 

CUTLERS'  COMPANY,  COURT  OF  ASSISTANTS  IN,  lies  to  restore 
one  to  be  one  in  the  Court  of  Assistants,  116. 


D. 


DAMAGES,  p.  116— see  tit.  Trial. 
DEAD,  116. 

June,  1852.-33 


514  tapping's    mandamus. 

DEAN,  lies  for  office  of,  116. 

lies  for  election  and  admission,  116. 

lies  to  elect  canon  residentiary  to  qualify  for  dean,  61,  116. 
DEAN  AND  CHAPTER,  lies  not  to  restore  clerk  of,  110. 

lies  not  for  a  register  of,  116. 
DE\N  OF  ARCHES,  116. 
DELEGATES'  COURTS,  116. 
DEMAND,  when  necessary,  84,  162,  163,  282,  283. 
by  whom  made,  283. 
when,  283. 

presumption  of  waiver,  283. 
to  whom  made,  284. 

if  more  than  one,  284. 
form  of,  284. 

when  in  alternative,  284. 
affidavit  of  having  been  made,  285,  294. 

may  be  amended  in  this  respect,  294. 
when  want  of  demand  can  be  taiien  advantage  of,  287,  290,  291. 
averment  in  writ  of  demand  and  refusal,  323. 
DEMURKER,  to  return — see  Mandamus,  Writ  of,  tit.  Return. 

to  plea,  replication,  rejoinder,  &c. — see  tit.  Plea. 
DEPOSITIONS,  116. 

DEPUTY  OFFICER,  116,  177,  289— see  tit.  Office. 
lies  for  deputy  registrar,  23. 
lies  to  admit  deputy  secretary,  164. 
lies  to  swear  in,  247. 
DESERTION  OF  OFFICE,  Return  of,  40,  .55,  196— see  lit.  Absenteeism. 
DIBM  CLAUSUM  EXTREMUM,  writ  of,  1,  n.  (a). 
DIGNITY,  lies  not  to  restore  to,  117,  261. 
DIRECTION  OF  WRIT,  to  whom  to  be  directed,  310—319. 
to  corporate  body,  314,  317. 
what  direction  should  contain,  314,  ef  seq. 
if  defective  ground  for  superseding  or  quashing,  317. 
in  what  capacity  must  corporate  body  be  addressed,  317. 
direction  to  officers  of,  ol7. 
college,  direction  to,  317. 
inhabitants  of  parish,  direction  to,  317. 
parish  office  direction  to  fellow  officer,  318. 
return  of,  341. 

by  several  corporations,  officers,  &c.  343. 
DIRECTORS  OF  COMPANY,  117. 

lies  to  swear  in,  41. 
DISAVOWING  RETURN— see  tit.  Writ  of  Mandamus. 
DISCRETION— see  tit.  Duty. 

in  what  cases  of  discretion  the  writ  lies,  13,  13  n.  (z),  14,  47. 
lies  not  in  general  to  control  it,  13,  40,  102,  144,  145,  n. 
otherwise  if  exercised  with  injustice,  14,  41. 
lies  to  compel  exercise  of  discretion,  14,  117. 
form  of  writ,  117. 
returns,  117. 
DISSENTERS,  lies  to  admit  dissenting  minister,  118,  140. 
lies  to  admit  minister  to  qualify,  118. 
lies  to  restore,  118. 
lies  not  to  oblige  dissenting  minister  to  give  security  not   to   become 

chargeable  to  parish,  118. 
lies  to  register  meeting  house,  118,  119. 

return,  119 — see  tit.  Conviction. 
lies  to  hear  an  appeal  against  a  conviction  for  keeping  a  conventicle, 

119. 
lies  not  to  allow  a  dissenting  minister  to  preach,  10,  119. 


INDEX.  515 

DISTRESS,  lies  to  grant  a  warrant  of  distress,  22,  25, 119. 

remedy  by,  a  bar  to  writ,  21,  80,  119. 
DISTRIBUTION  OF  INTESTATE'S  ESTATES,  lies  for,  30,  119. 
DISTRINGAS  SURETORES— see  tit.  Picas. 
DOCK,  119. 

DOVER  GAOL,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
DRAINAGE,  lies  to  Commissioners  of  Sowers,  120. 

lies  to  swear  in  commissioners,  120. 

lies  to  perform  duties,  120 — see  tit.  Commissioners. 

lies  for  compensation,  when,  120 — see  tit.  Duties. 

lies  to  reimburse  money  expended,  120,  121. 

lies  to  make  sewers'  rate,  121. 
returns,  15,  21. 

lies  to  apportion  an  assessment,  121. 

lies  to  grant  inspection  of  boolis,  &c.  121 — see  tit.  Bedford  Level. 
DRUNKENNESS,  return  of,  40,  197,  212,  213. 
DURHAM,  ciiancellor  of,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 

freemasons  of,  lies  to  admit  and  swear,  122. 
DUTIES,  lies  to  enforce  performance  of  duties,  9,  82,  81,  88,  120,  122,  149, 
168,  189,  309. 

must  be  public,  12,  168. 

must  be  temporal,  12,  68. 
when  need  not  be,  12. 

must  be  imperative,  12. 

must  not  be  discretionary,  12,  13. 

not  granted  in  anticipation  of  a  neglect,  &c.,  of  duties,  10,  15,  119,  189. 

application,  affidavits,  &c.  292. 

return  of  breach  of,  39,  198. 

averment  in  writ  of  defendant's  duty,  322,  323. 


E. 

EAST  INDIA  COMPANY,  lies  to  perform  duties  by,  122. 
ECCLESIAS  riCAL  COURT,  122. 

lies  not  for  officers  of,  108. 
ECCLESIASTICAL  JURISDICTION,  lies  not  for  any  thing  solely   within, 
22,  108. 

not  to  connect  its  errors,  22. 
EJECTMENT,  remedy  by  bar  to  writ,  21,  292. 
ELISORS,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
ELECTION  TO  OFFICE— see  tit.  Office  {Election?). 
ELECTUS  NON  FUIT,  return  of,  42,  72,  73,  187,  188.  194. 
ENDORSEMENT  ON  WRIT,  330— see  tit.  Wrif  o/Mawt/awms. 
ENTRY  OF  WRIT  ON  RECORD,  8. 

of  return,  8. 

of  demurrer,  8. 
EQUITABLE  RIGHT,  122. 

lies  not  for  equitable  rights  under  stat.  11  Geo.  4,  and  1  Wm.  4,  c.  60, 
22. 
EQUITY,  lies  not  for  a  pure  subject  of,  22,  29. 

nor  lor  a  subject  in  litigation  in  equity,  23. 
ERASURE  of  corporation  books,  return  of,  40,  197. 
ERROR,  writ  of,  8,  397,  451,  458. 

when  it  lies,  7,8,  397. 

statutory  enactment  as  to  formulae,  8,  398. 

joinder  in  error,  399. 

proceedings  thereon,  8. 


51G  tapping's    mandamus, 

ERROR— continued. 

for  false  return — see  False  Return. 

lies  to  correct  extra-judicial  errors  of  inferior  jurisdictions,  11,  17. 
ETON,  PllOVOST  OF,  lies  to  admit,  122. 
EXCISK,  lies  to  grant  permit,  122, 

lies  to  hear  appeal  against  an  excise  conviction,  122. 

lies  to  give  judgment  in  an  excise  case,  122. 

lies  to  administer  an  oath  in  order  to  obtain  drawback,  123. 
EXCOMMUNICATE,  123. 
EXECUTION,  110,  123. 

by  fi.  fa.,  ca.  sa.,  &c.,  bar  to  writ,  23. 

of  mandamus  within  wliat  time,  6. 

writ  of, 

when  issuable,  7,  392,  400. 

when  tested,  400. 

when  returnable,  400, 

requisites  of,  400, 

as  to  execution  for  costs,  8, 
EXPENDITOR,  123— see  tits.  Drainage.     Sewers. 


F. 

FALSE  RETURN,  what  is,  6,  7,  341,  342,  343,  344,  383,  428. 

action  for,  7,  42.5. 

in  what  Court,  429. 

plaintiffs,  429. 

defendants,  430. 

declaration,  430, 

action  for  is  local,  431, 

when  venue  changed,  431. 

evidence,  &c.  431. 

verdict,  432. 

damages,  6,  7. 

error,  432. 

peremptory  writ,  7. 

costs  of,  432, 

as  to  criminal  information  for,  432. 

where  it  lies,  432. 

against  whom,  432. 

motion  for,  433. 

affidavits  in  support,  43.3. 

when  moved  for,  433, 

venue,  433, 

when  changed,  433. 

evidence,  434, 

what  sufficient,  434. 

verdict,  434. 

imposition  of  fines,  434. 
FAVBRSHAM,  FREE  FISHERMEN  OF,  lies  to  restore,  123. 
FEES,  123— see  tit.  Action. 

when  remedy  by  action  for,  bars  writ,  21,24. 

when  refusal  to  pay  fees  bars  writ,  21,  24. 

table  of  fees  to  be  taken  by  officers  of  Crown  Office,  463. 
FEIGNED  ISSUE,  when  directed,  &c,  342,412. 

practice  of,  412. 
FELLOWS,  123 

FELO  DE  SE,  when  writ  is,  328,  337. 
FENCES,  lies  to  repair,  15,  131. 


INDEX.  517 

FESTINUM  REMEDIUM,  mandamus  is,  4,  n.  (ft),  25. 

FILING,  writ — see  tit.  Writ  of  Mandaimis.     Return — see  tit.  Writ  of  Man- 
damus.    Affidavits — see  tit.  Affidavits. 
FINES,  on  manorial  admittances,  &lc.  1.58,  160. 

imposition  of  fines  for  false  and  contemptuous  returns,  296,  297,  366,  373 
n.,  434. 
FISHERY,  PRIVATE,  lies  to  hear  an  appeal  against  conviction  for  trespass- 
ing-, 123 — see  it.  Appeal. 
FOOTWAY,  123— see  tit.  Ilitrhway. 

FORCIBLE  ENTRY  AND  DETAINER,  lies  to  justices  to  put  in  force  sta- 
tutes, 123. 
lies  not  to  g-rant  restitution  under,  124. 
FOREST  LAW,  124. 
FRANCHISE,  lies  for  franchises,  96,  124. 

application,  124. 
FREE  BURGESS,  124. 

FREEDOM,  lies  to  admit  to  freedom  of  city,  124,  125. 
rule  124,  125,  29S. 
lies  to  restore  to  freedom  of  city,  125. 
lies  to  admit  to  freedom  of  company,  125. 
rule,  126. 
returns,  125,  126. 
lies  to  swear  in  to  office  of  freemen,  126. 
lies  to  restore  to  the  freedom  of  a  company,  126,  127. 
returns,  127,  123. 
FREEMAN,  lies  not  to  an  inquiry  jury  to  present  persons  to  be  freemen,   127 
— see  tit.  Discretion. 
lies  to  admit  or  swear  into  the  office  of,  127. 
lies  to  restore  a  freeman,  126,  127. 
form  of  writ,  127,  128. 
returns,  127,  128. 
FREEMASONS  OF  DURHAM,  128. 
FRIENDLY  SOCIETIES,  lies  to  enrol  and  confirm  rules  of,  12«. 

lies  to  justices  to  hear  a  complaint  as  to  a  friendly  society,  128. 
FUNDS,  return  of  no,  109,  244,  359. 

G. 

GAME  LAWS,  lies  to  hear  appeal  against  conviction  under  stat.  52  Geo.  3, 

c.  93—123,  129. 
GAMING,  lies  to  hear  appeal  against  conviction,  under  stat.  12  Geo.  2,  c.  23 

—129. 
GAOL,  lies  to  justices  to  consider  report  of  gaol  visitina:  justices,  129. 
GILTSPUR  STREET  COMPTER,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
GOODS,  142,  244. 
GUARDIANS  OF  POOR,  lies  to  erect,  129. 

duties,  «&c.,  129. 

lies  to  appoint  clerk  to  guardians,  129,  130. 

lies  to  admit  clerk  of,  130. 

lies  not  to  restore  clerk,  130. 
GUILDFORD,  APPROVED  MEN  OF,  lies  to  restore,  130. 
GUNMAKERS'  COMPANY,  lies  not  to  restore  to  office  of  approver  of  gun?, 
1:30. 

as  to  admission,  130. 

H. 
HALF-PAY,  lies  not  for,  130. 


SIS'  T  A  P  P  I  N  a  '  a     MANDAMUS. 

HAVERING  COURT,  131. 

lies  for  attorney  to  practice  in,  44. 
IIEARIXG,  131,  2:30— see  tit.  Courts. 
II  EDGES,  131. 
HIGH  CONSTABLE,  131. 

HIGHWAY,  lies  to  set  out  and  make  a  road,  131. 
to  execute  or  widen,  &c.  131. 

lies  to  make  proper  fences,,  walls,  hedges,  &c.,  15,  131. 

lies  to  repair  a  wall  on  road  side,  131,  132. 

lies  to  repair  and  cut  hedges,  132. 

lies  to  hear  an  appeal  as  to  statute  duty,  132. 

lies  to  perform  statute  duty,  132. 

lies  not  to  repair  turnpike  road,  132. 

lies  nnt  for  repair  of  liighway,  25. 

lies  to  receive  and  proceed  upon  a  general  traverse  of  a  presentment  of 
non-repair  of  road,  132,  133. 

lies  to  issue  warrant  for  payment  of  costs  of  non-repair  of,  indictment  for 
non-repair  of  road,  133, 

lies  to  hear  complaint  as  to  obstructions  of  highway,  133. 

as  to  compensation,  133. 

as  to  diverting  and  stopping  up  highway,  133, 1.34. 

lies  to  hear  a  complaint  as  to  toll-gate,  when,  134,  291. 

lies  to  establish  an  uniform  rate  of  tolls,  134. 

lies  to  hear  an  appeal  against  conviction  for  non-payment  of  tolls,  134,  302* 

lies  to  make  a  highway  rate,  134,  291. 

lies  to  levy  a  distress  for  rate,  134. 

lies  to  appoint  road  surveyors,  135. 

lies  to  swear  in  surveyors,  135. 

lies  to  surveyor  to  pass  accounts,  1.35. 

lies  to  make  a  rate  to  reimburse  surveyors,  1.35,  1.36. 

lies  to  surveyor  to  deliver  up  books,  136 — see  tit.  Return. 

lies  to  allow  inspection  of  books,  136. 

lies  to  admit  to  the  office  of  clerk  of  turnpike  trustees,  136. 

lies  to  restore,  &c.,  136. 

lies  to  pay  arrears  of  rent  of  land  on  which  road  made,  136. 

lies  to  surveyor  to  repair  road,  136. 

lies  to  hear  appeal  against  conviction  under  turnpike  acts,  136,  137. 
HOSPITAL,  lies  to  restore  a  sister,  137. 

lies  not  to  sweat  in  surgeon,  137. 

lies  not  to  restore  surgeon,  137. 

lies  to  proper  officer  to  affix  hospital  seal,  137. 
HOSPITALLER,  lies  not  to  restore,  1.37. 
HOSTMEiN  OF  NEWCASTLE,  137. 
HOUSE  OF  CORIIECTION,  MIDDLESEX,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311, 

I. 

IMPOSSIBILITY,  return  of,  .359. 

LNCAPAX,  return  of,  72,  186,  1()7,  279,  359. 

LNCLOSURE,  lies  to  hear  appeal  against  order  of  commissioners,  137. 

lies  to  ascertain  if  any  modus  as  to  lands  inclosed,  137,  13:f. 

lies  to  effect  an  exchange,  138. 

lies  to  set  dut  occupation  road,  138,  291. 
INCOMPATIBLE  OFFICE,  nturn  of  acceptance  of,  197. 
INDEMNITY,  provided  by  stat.  6  &.  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  3—13. 
l.NDIC  rMENT,  when  no  bar  to  writ,  19,  24,  25. 

when  a  bar  to  writ,  24,  25. 
INDUCEMENT  OF  WRIT,  form  of,  309. 

substance  of,  319 — see  tit.  Writ  nf  Mandamus. 


INDEX.  519 

INFERIOR  JURISDICTION,  lies  to  compel  performance  of  duties  by,  11,  31, 

105,  100. 
INFERIOR  MINISTERIAL  OFFICER,  lies  not  to,  84,  103, 104,  177. 
INFORMATION,  lies  to  hear,  31. 

for  false  return — see  tit.  False  Return. 
INHABITANTS,  &c.,  writ  ag-ainst,  30-5. 

form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  317,  318. 
INHIBITION,  return  of,  72,  138. 
INN  BURGESS  OP  WIGAN,  138. 
INN  OF  CHANCERY,  lies  not  to,  138, 

as  to  admission,  &c.,  138. 
INN  OF  COURT,  lies  not  to,  36,  138. 

lies  not  to  admit  member,  138. 

lies  not  to  admit  to  degree,  139. 

lies  not  to  restore  to  degree,  139. 
INQUEST,  lies  not  to  jury  to  find  a  particular  fact,  139 — see  tit.  Jury. 
INSANITY,  139. 
INSIGNIA,  94,  139,  2-56. 

INSOLVENCY,  return  of,  278— see  tit.  Poverty. 

INSOLVENT,  lies  to  assign  goods  of  insolvent,  under  stat.  2  Geo.  2,  c.  22, 
139. 

lies  to  commissioners  to  hear  petition  as  to,  139. 

lies  to  discharge,  139,  140. 
INSTITUTIONS,  PRIVATE,  lies  for  some,  140. 
INSPECTION  OF  BOOKS,  ROLLS,  &c.,  140. 
INTERPLEADER,  in  Mandamus  cases,  411. 

practice  of,  411,  448. 
ISSUE  ON  PLEADINGS,  7— see  tit.  Plea. 


J. 

JEOFAILS— see  tit.  Trial. 
JOINDER,  in  "error — see  tit.  Error. 

in  demurrer — ^see  tit.  Demurrer, 
JOINERS'  COMPANY,  140. 
JOINT  STOCK  COMPANY,  140. 

JUDGMENT,  when  it  lies  to  enforce  judgment,  140,  141,  191. 
lies  to  give  judgment,  110,  122,  123. 
by  default  of  plea — see  tit.  Plea. 
on  verdict — how  given,  7,  39.5. 
how  amended,  quashed,  &c.,  395. 
how  signed,  &c.,  395. 

entry  of  proceedings  and  judgment  on  the  roll,  395. 
how  entered,  390. 
nunc  pro  tunc,  396. 
as  in  case  of  nonsuit,  396. 
non  obstante  veredicto,  397. 
motion  in  arrest  of,  397. 
motion  for  new  trial,  397. 
JURAT,  lies  for  office  of,  141. 
lies  to  elect,  141. 
lies  to  admit  and  swear  in,  141. 
lies  to  restore,  141. 

lies  to  return  a  jurat  as  mayor  elect,  141. 
JURISDICTION  OF  WRIT,  formerly  Court  more  astute  in  seeing  its  juris- 
diction than  now.  111. 
the  jurisdiction  of  writ,  extent  of,  290,  297. 
comprehends  execution  of  common  law,  11. 


520  tapping's    mandamus. 

JURISDICTION  OF  WRIT— continued. 

of  statutes,  11. 

of  Acts  of  Parliament,  11,  12,  30. 

of  charters,  11,  64. 

not  applicable  as  a  private  remedy,  5,  11,  64,  118,  140. 

to  correct  errors,  11, 105. 

to  restore  to  offices,  12,  190. 

to  allow  exercise  of  office,  12. 

to  perform  a  service,  12. 

to  exercise  a  function,  12. 

to  e.vercise  a  franchise,  12. 

not  granted  in  anticipation  of  defect  of  duly,  &c.,  10,  15,  IIQ. 

lies  to  command  a  ministerial  duty,  12 — see  tit.  Duties. 
a  judicial  duty,  12. 
form  of  writ,  when  to  enforce  a  judicial  duty,  13. 

the  Jurisdiction  to  grant  the  writ  must  be  clear,  11,  30. 

averment  of  jurisdiction  in  affidavits,  294,  414. 

averment  of  jurisdiction  in  writ,  319,  320. 
JURY,  lies  not  to  a  jury  to  find  a  particular  verdict,  141. 
JURY  PROCESS— see  tit.  Plea. 
JUSTICES,  direction  of  writ  to,  311,  318. 
JUSTICES  OF  ASSIZE,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
JUSTICES'  CLERK,  lies  not  to  restore,  141. 

lies  not  for  compensation  for  loss  of  office,  141. 


K. 

KEYS,  64,  65,  142. 

KING,  142— see  tit.  Crown. 

KING'S  BEAM,  lies  to  restore  Master  Weigher  of,  142. 

KNIGHT,  142. 

KNIGHT  TEMPLAR,  lies  not  to  restore,  142. 

L. 

LABOURER,  return  of,  71. 

LANCASTER,  Chancellor  of,  form  of  direction  of  writ,  to,  311. 

LANDLORD,  lies  to  justices  to  enforce  stat.  11  Geo.  2,  c.  19,  s.  6—142. 

lies  not  to  magistrates  to  give  restitution  under  stat.  11  Geo.  2,  c.  19,  pur- 
suant to  an  order  of  justices  of  assize,  142. 

lies  to  hear  an  appeal  against  a  conviction  under  stat.  11  Geo.  2,  c.  19, 
s.  4,  for  having  fraudulently  removed  goods,  142. 
LAND  TAX  COMMISSIONERS,  lies  to  elect  or  admit  clerk  to,  142,  143. 
LECTURESHIP,  what,  143. 

lies  for,  when,  143,  144. 

lies  to  elect  a  lecturer,  144. 

lies  to  inquire  whether  applicant  a  fit  person  to  be  lecturer,  144,  145. 

lies  not  to  license,  144,  145  n. 
application  for  writ,  145,  146. 

lies  to  admit  a  lecturer,  145. 

lies  to  grant  compensation  for  loss  of  office  under  stat.  5  &  6  Wm.  4,  c.  76, 
s.  68—145. 
LEET  COURT,  146. 
LEET  COURT  STEWARD,  146. 
LI^GACY,  lies  not  for  payment  of,  146. 
LIBEL  of  superior  officer,  return  of,  197,  198. 
LIBRARIAN  OF  COLLEGE,  146. 


INDEX.  521 

LICENSE,  23,  40,  146. 

LICENSE  TO  DEMISE,  146. 

LICENSE  TO  DIG,  146. 

LIGHTING  RATE,  146. 

LIS  PENDENS,  return  of  when  good,  23,  35,  72. 

when  it  bars  the  writ,  9,  35,  278. 
LIVERY,  lies  to  admit  a  liveryman,  146. 

lies  to  admit  liverymen  to  a  company,  146. 
LIVINGS,  lies  to  inspect  register  of,  146,  147. 
LOANS  FOR  CHURCHES,  147. 
LOANS  FOR  PARISHES,  147,  170. 
LONDON,  147. 
LORD  MAYOR'S  COURT,  147. 

lies  for  attorney  to  practice  in,  44. 
LORD  MAYOR  OF  LONDON,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
LUNATIC,  lies  to  hear  appeal  against  removal  of  pauper  lunatic,  147. 


M. 

MACE,  147,  256. 

MAGNA  CHARTA,  mandamus  founded  on,  2,  5,  44  n.  (h)  171. 

MANDAMUS,  lies  to  enforce  result  of  previous  mandamus,  147. 

lies  not  for  costs  of  a  former  mandamus  if  there  be  another  remedy, 
147,  148— see  tit.  Writ  of  Mandamus. 
MANDATORY  CLAUSE, 

what,  6,  323. 

substance  of,  6,  324. 

what  necessary,  325. 

at  instance  of  whom  may  the  writ  command,  325. 

difference  in  substance  between  judicial  and  ministerial  acts,  325. 

under  acts  of  Parliament,  325. 

form  of,  16,  325. 

what  it  should  allege,  326,  327. 

value  of  term  "forthwith,"  328. 

final  sentence  of,  328. 
MANOR, 
Court  Leet,  lies  to  hold,  148,  149. 

lies  to  permit  it  to  be  holden  in  the  accustomed  place,  149. 

lies  to  compel  attendance  of  jury,  149. 

lies  to  summon  a  jury  to  attend,  149,  150. 

lies  to  transact  business  of,  149. 

lies  to  appoint  all  officers,  &c.  89,  149,  150. 

lies  to  charge  the  jury  to  make  proper  presentments,  150. 

lies  to  admit,  hear,  and  proceed  upon  a  plaint,  150. 
returns  thereto,  150. 

lies  to  enrol  and  swear  in  a  resiant,  when,  150,  151. 

will  not  be  granted  to  administer  the  oath  of  allegiance,  lol- 
lies to  inspect  records  of  leet,  151. 

lies  for  office  of  steward  of  leet,  151. 

lies  to  admit  steward  of  leet,  151. 

lies  to  restore  steward  of  leet,  151. 
Court  Baron,  lies  to  hold,  151,  152. 

lies  to  permit  it  to  be  holden  in  the  accustomed  place,  152. 

lies  to  command  performance  of  the  business  of  the  Court  as  to  present 
conveyances,  152. 

lies  not  for  office  of  steward  of  Court  Baron,  when,  152,  153. 

lies  not  to  swear  in  steward  of  Court  Baron,  153. 

lies  not  to  restore  steward  of  Court  Baron,  153— see  tit.  Baron  {Court.) 


522  tapping's    mandamus. 

MANOR — continued. 

Copyhold  Court,  lies  not  for  office  of  steward  of  Copyliold  Court,  153. 

lies  not  for  the  office  of  bailiff,  1.53. 
lies  to  present  a  mannrial  custom,  153. 
lies  not  to  grant  a  license  when,  153,  154. 

lies  for  admittance  to  a  customary  or  copyhold  tenement,  151,  155,  156, 
157,  IGO. 
but  not  wJicn  parcel  of  a  royal  manor,  154  n.  157,  158,  159. 
when  the  Court  will  require  payment  of  fiaes,  1.58,  160,  161. 
application  for  writ,  158. 
affidavits,  158. 
rule,  158. 
form  of  writ,  direction,  158. 

returns,  159. 
lies  to  receive  a  surrender  when,  159,  160. 
lies  to  enter  a  deed  upon  tiie  Court  rolls,  when,  160,  161. 
application  for  writ,  IGl. 
rule,  161. 
form  of  writ,  161. 
returns,  161. 
lies  to  deliver  up  Court  rolls,  when,  161. 
lies  to  grant  inspection  thereof,  when,  161,  162,  163. 
application  for  inspection,  163. 
rule  for  writ,  164,  298. 
MANOR  COURTS,  164. 

Marches,  lies  for  election  of  clerk  of  fines  in,  164. 
lies  to  admit  deputy  secretary  of,  164. 
lies  to  restore  such  officer,  164. 
MARRIAGES,  Registrar  of,  164. 
MARSHALSEA,  court  of,  165. 
lies  to  admit  to,  44. 
lies  to  restore  attorney  of,  45. 
MASONS'  COMPANY,  lies  to  restore  clerk  of,  165. 
MASTER  OF  COLLEGE,  165. 
MASTER  OF  SCHOOL,  165. 
MAYOR,  lies  for  office  of,  165. 

lies  to  elect  a  mayor,  when,  165. 

lies  to  return  a  person  as  mayor  elect,  166. 

application  for  writ,  v\hen  to  be  made,  16G,  167. 

affidavits  in  support  of,  167. 

rule,  167. 

form  of  writ  direction,  167,  315,  316. 

lies  to  admit  to  the  office  of  mayor,  167. 

lies  to  swear  in  thereto,  167,  168. 

return  thereto,  168. 
lies  to  compel  performance  of  duties  of  mayor,  31,  168. 
application  for  such  writ,  163. 

returns,  163. 
lies  to  restore  to  the  office  of  mayor  when,  163. 
MAYOR'S  COURT,  163. 
iMERCHANT  TAILORS'  COMPANY,  lies  to  elect  master  and  wardens  of, 

168,  169. 
MEETING,  lies  to  convene  a  meeting,  37,  33,  69,  208,270. 
MEETING  HOUSE,  169. 

illLITiA,  lies  to  declare  commissions  vacant,  169. 
MINISTER,  169. 

^IL\T,  lies  not  to  restore  a  workman  in  the  Mint,  169. 
MODUS,  169,  261. 
MONEY,  lies  to  pay  money,  if  no  other  remedy,  169,  170,  210, 


INDEX.  523 

MONEY — continued. 

lies  to  an  overseer  to  pay  money  under  a  parish  contract,  169. 

return  of  money  lending-,  'A9. 
MONEYER  OF  THE  MINT,  170. 
MONK,  lies  not  to  restore,  170. 
MOTIONS,  in  arrest  of  judgment — see  tit.  Judgment.     For  new  trial — see 

tit.  Judgment.     For  peremptory  writ. — see  tit.  Feremptorij  Writ.     For 

attachment — see  tit.  Altachment. 
MUNIMENTS,  OFFICIAL,  lies  for  delivery  of  against  one  claiming,   ex 

officio,  21. 


N. 

NEWCASTLE,  HOSTMEN  OF,  lies  to  admit  to  fraternity  of,  170. 
NEWGATE,  lies  to  pay  Newgate  fees  to  clerk  of  session  and  gaol  delivery,  170. 

form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  312. 
NEW  PRISON,  CLERKENWELL,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  312. 
NEW  RIVER  WATER,  lies  to  restore  surveyor  of,  170. 

lies  to  restore  treasurer  of,  171,  n.  (e). 
NEW  TRIAL,  110,  17L 
NON  COMPOS,  return  of,  279. 
NON-RESIDENCE,  removal  from  office  for,  11. 

return  of  non-residence,  11,  40,  196,  197. 
form  of,  40. 
NOTICE  OF  TRIAL— see  tit.  Plea. 
NUISANCE,  lies  to  remove,  171. 

lies  to  give  judgment  for  abating  nuisance,  171. 

lies  not  to  command  commission  of  legal  nuisance,  16. 


O. 

OATH  OF  ALLEGIANCE,  171. 
OATHS,  39,  126,  171,  262,  263,  441. 

lies  to  command  tender  of  oaths  under  stat.  1  Wm.  Sl  M.  c.  8 — 80. 

return  of  not  having  taken,  39,  42,  126,  187,  188,  198,  263. 
OFFICE,  the  writ  lies  for  certain  offices,  26,  27,  171. 

lies  for  a  function,  172. 

lies  for  a  franchise,  172. 

lies  for  a  spiritual  office,  172,  173. 

lies  for  a  temporal  office,  172,  173. 

lies  for  a  judicial  or  ministerial  office,  172,  173. 

lies  to  command  officers  to  do  their  duty  if  no  other  remedy,  9,  172. 

offices,  for  what  it  lies,  173. 

for  a  function,  with  fees,  173. 

must  be  public,  12,  12,  n.  (g),  1.30,  17.3,  174,  186. 

there  must  be  no  specific  legal  remedy,  174. 

lies  not  for  a  private  office,  115,  174. 

lies  not  for  an  appointment  at  will,  174,  175. 

the  office  must  be  known  to  tiie  law,  174,  186,  294,  310. 

must  be  a  freehold  office,  174,  175. 

not  for  an  office  at  will,  175. 
returns,  175,  176. 

there  must  be  fees,  &.C.,  12,  12,  n.  (g),  143, 144,  170. 

officers  need  not  be  sworn  officers,  176. 

lies  for  judicial  and  ministerial  officers,  176. 

lies  not  to  inferior  ministerial  officers,  177. 


524  tapping's    mandamus. 

OFFICE— co7itinued. 

when  it  lies  to  admit  a  deputy,  177,  178. 

returns  thereto,  178. 
lies  to  restore  a  deputy,  178. 

application,  by  whom  made,  178. 
lies  not  for  officers  of  legal  Courts,  178. 
when  it  lies  for  officers  ecclesiastical,  178. 
when  it  lies  for  a  spiritual  officer,  178. 

Election,  lies  to  elect  to  an  office,  when  37,  69, 179,  180,  182,  183. 

definite  number  of  officers,  37,  179. 

election  of  municipal  officers,  179,  180,  181,  182. 

lies  to  return  election,  37. 

notice  of  application,  183,  184.    ■ 

affidavits,  184. 

application,  priority  of  motion,  36,  37,  184. 

rule,  37,  38,  184,  185,  298. 

service  of,  38. 
writ,  form  of,  37,  38,  185. 

Admission  lies  to  admit,  6,  38,  42,  185. 

application  for,  186. 

affidavits,  186. 

rule,  186,  298. 

writ,  form  of,  186. 

returns,  traverses,  186. 

lies  to  admit  and  swear,  38,  298. 

lies  to  return  and  admit,  38. 

return,  incapax,  186, 

not  qualified,  186. 

non  fuit  electus,  187. 

condition  precedent,  187. 

oaths,  187, 188. 

Swearing  in,  lies  to,  38,  188. 

rule,  188,  298,  303. 

returns,  non  fuit  electus,  188, 189. 

Enforcing  duties,  lies  to  enforce  duties  of  office,  189. 

lies  not  to  restrain  abuse  of  office,  189. 

Deprivation,  lies  not  to  deprive  of  office,  28,  33, 190. 

Restoration,  lies  to  restore  to  office,  6,  12,  38,  190,  191,  292. 

■ Suspension,  lies  not  for  suspension  from  office,  192,  193. 

application  for  restoration,  193,  292. 
rule  for  writ,  193,  194,  298. 
writ,  form  of,  194. 
returns,  traverses,  194. 

non  fuit  amotus,  194. 

non  fuit  admissus,  194. 

non  fuit  electus,  194. 

non  appunctuatus,  194. 

no  such  office,  194. 

Special  Returns,  194,  195. 

the  cause  of  removal,  195,  196,  198,199. 

the  power  of  removal,  19.5, 199,  200, 

a  summons,  195,  200,  201,  202,  203. 

timt  causes  of  removal  are  true,  195,  203,204,  212,  213. 

that  removal  founded  upon  alleged  causes,  195,  204. 
OFFICERS,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  317. 
ORGANIST,  lies  not  for  election  of,  204. 

lies  not  to  admit,  204. 
OVERSEERS  OF  THE  POOR,  lies  to  elect,  204,  205,  298. 

rule,  298. 
lies  to  appoint,  32,  204,  289. 


INDEX.  525 


OVERSEERS  OF  THE  POOR— continued. 

application,  205. 

affidavits,  205. 

return,  205. 
lies  to  swear  in,  205,  206. 
lies  to  perform  duty,  206. 
lies  to  render  accounts,  206. 
lies  for  inspection  of  acoiints,  16. 
lies  to  allow  accounts,  206,  207. 
lies  to  pay  balance  of  accounts,  207. 


PALACE  COURT,  208. 
PAPERS  OFFICIAL,  208. 

PARISH,  lies  to  convene  meeting  of  parishioners,  208. 
lies  to  elect  parish  officers,  208. 
lies  to  elect  auditors,  208. 
lies  to  produce  parish  accounts,  208. 
lies  to  grant  inspection  of  parish  books,  209. 

rule,  298. 
lies  to  deliver  up  parish  books,  209. 
as  to  burial  of  parishioners,  209. 
lies  to  repay  parish  loan,  209,  210. 

lies  to  hear  appeal  as  to  payment  of  parish  annuities,  210. 
as  to  repayment  of  money  overdue  on  parish  rates,  210. 
lies  for  parish  to  pay  its  proportion  of  union  expenses,  210. 
lies  to  make  a  parish  rate,  210. 

lies  to  issue  distress  warrants  against  defaulters  as  to  rates,  210. 
direction  of  writ  to,  how  made,  317,  318. 
officer  direction  against  fellow  officer,  317,  318. 
PARISH  CLERK,  lies  for  parish  clerk,  211. 
lies  to  appoint,  211. 
lies  to  admit,  211. 
lies  to  admit  a  deputy,  211. 
lies  to  swear  in,  211,  212. 

lies  to  swear  in  to  joint  offices  of  parish  clerk  and  sexton,  212. 
lies  to  restore  a  parish  clerk,  212. 
application  for  writ,  212. 
affidavits,  212. 
writ,  form  of,  212. 
returns,  212,  213. 
PARSON,  when  it  lies  to  admit,  &c.,  213. 

lies  for  salary  of,  payable  under  act  of  Parliament,  213. 
lies  to  a  municipal  corporation  to  secure  tlie  stipend  of  a  minister  by 
bond,  213. 
PATENT,  lies  not  to  enforce  a  contract  arising  from  a  patent  right,  213, 

214. 
PAVEMENTS,  214. 
PAVING  RATE,  214. 
PEACE,  ARTICLES  OF,  lies  to  take  articles  of  peace,  214. 

lies  not  to  correct  an  error  fatal  to  a  recognizance,  214. 
PEACE,  CLERK  OF,  lies  for,  214. 
lies  to  admit,  215. 
lies  to  restore,  215. 
PENALTY,  lies  not  if  its  execution  renders  liable  to  a  statutory  penalty, 

17,  31. 
PENITENTIARY,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  312. 
PENSION,  when  it  lies  for  payment  of  a  government  pension,  215,  216. 


526  tapping's    mandamus. 

PENTONVILLE  PRISON,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  312. 
PEREMPTORY  WRIT  OF,  what,  400. 
where  granted,  7,  8,  400,  403. 
cannot  be  limited,  400. 
when  application  for  suspended,  403. 
who  bound  by,  403. 
who  estopped,  403. 

effect  of  peremptory  writ  in  certain  cases,  403. 
against  whom  granted,  404. 
how  obtained,  404. 
statutory  enactments  thereon,  404, 
motion  for,  40G. 
where,  406. 
when  made,  406. 
rule  nisi  and  absolute,  107. 
when  peremptory  in  first  instance,  407. 
form  of  writ,  7,  407. 
how  issued,  408. 
service  thereof,  8. 
return  of,  7,  408. 
penalty  on  neglect  of,  8. 
setting  aside,  403. 
quashing,  8. 
amendment  of,  409. 
PERMIT,  216. 

PERPETUAL  CURATES,  216. 
PETTY  SESSIONS,  216. 

PHYSICIANS'  COLLEGE  OF,  lies  not  to  command  examination  for, 
216. 

lies  not  to  admit,  217. 

lies  not  to  restore,  217. 

lies  not  to  license,  217. 
PLAINT,  217. 
PLEA,  what,  3S2,  888. 

when  return  made  traversable  by  stat.,  383. 

time  to  plead,  383. 

how  obtained,  384. 

when  right  to  file  pleas  ceases,  384. 

rule  to  plead,  when  to  be  given,  334. 

when  drawn  up  and  served,  384. 

when  expires,  384. 

enforcing  plea,  384. 

how  made,  38.5. 

form  of  plea,  7,38.5. 

when  to  be  signed  by  counsel,  355,  n. 

when  rule  to  plead  several  matters  necessary,  335,  n. 

filing,  366. 

withdrawal  of,  386. 

judgment  by  default,  386,  337,  440. 

when  and  how  entered,  386. 

when  set  aside,  386. 

demurrer  to  prosecutor's  plea,  387. 

replication,  7,  387. 

rejoinder,  &c.,  7,  367. 

grant  of  time  to  reply,  rejoin,  &c.,  397,  n. 

rules  to  reply,  &c.,  387. 

form  of,  387  n. 

issue,  7,  387. 

notice  of  trial,  388. 


INDEX.  627 

PLEA — continued. 

form  of,  388. 

subpcena,  when  tested,  388. 

how  served,  388 — see  tits.  Trial,  Judgment,  Error. 

Record,  388. 

by  whom  made  up,  388. 

how  sealed  and  carried  in,  388. 

form  of,  388  n. 

Jurij  Process,  what,  389. 

venire  facias  juratores,  when  to  be  tested,  389. 
distringas  juratores  when  tested,  389. 

' Special  Jury,  when  obtained,  389. 

PLEADING  RULES,  in  mandamus  cases,  8  n.  (y)  348. 
PLURIES  WRIT,  see  tit.  Writ  of  Manda7nus,  333. 
POOR,  lies  for  relief  of,  217,  218,  297. 

lies  for  maintenance  of,  217,  218,  297. 
lies  to  hear  an  appeal  against  an  order  of  removal,  218,  219. 
lies  to  quarter  sessions  to  state  a  special  case,  219. 
lies  to  allow  apprentice  indenture,  219,  220. 
lies  to  make  a  poor  rate,  220,  221,  289,  297. 
lies  not  to  reimburse  overseers'  money  paid  for  relief  of  poor,  221, 
application,  221. 
writ,  form  of,  221. 
lies  to  sign  a  poor  rate,  221,  222. 
lies  to  allow  a  poor  rate,  222,  298. 

rule,  222. 
lies  to  hear  appeal  against  poor  rate,  222. 
lies  to  hear  appeal  against  certificate  of  guardians,  222,  223. 
lies  not  for  collecting  a  poor  rate,  223. 
lies  not  for  inspection  of  poor  rate  books,  223. 
lies  to  deliver  over  rate  books,  223. 
lies  not  to  command  defaulters  to  pay  rates,  223. 
lies  to  summon  defaulters,  224. 
application,  225. 
rule,  225. 
lies  to  hear  an  application  for  repayment  of  money  overcharged  in  a  poor 

rate,  225. 
lies  to  guardians  to  obey  order  of  Poor  Law  Commissioners,  225. 
returns,  225. 
POOR  LAW  COMMISSIONERS,  225. 

form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
POOR  RATE,  225. 
PORTREEVE,  lies  to  elect  and  swear  in  a  portreeve,  225. 

as  to  insignia  of  portreeve,  22G. 
POVERTY,  return  of,  39,  71. 
PRACTICE,  in  mandamus  cases,  7,  8  n.  (y). 
PREBENDARY,  lies  for  election  of,  226. 

lies  to  institute,  induct,  and  invest,  61,  226. 

lies  to  instal,  226. 

lies  to  swear  in,  226. 

lies  to  admit,  61,  226,  227. 

return,  226. 
lies  to  restore,  when,  227. 
PRECEDENCE,  lies  for  loss  of,  191,  227. 

lies  to  restore  to,  39. 
PREROGATIVE  WRIT,  definition  of,  4  n.  (a)  5  n,  (/)  18. 
PRESENTATION  TO  OFFICE,  lies  for,  38,  127,  271, 
PRESENTMENT,  lies  not  for  the  presentment  of  a  fact  upon  oath,  when,  150, 
152,  227. 
lies  to  redress  a  grievance  shewn  upon  presentment,  132, 133,  227. 


528  tapping's    mandamus. 

PRESIDENT  OF  COLLEGE,  227. 

PRL\CIPAL  BURGESS,  227. 

PRIOR,  lies  not  for  a  prior,  227. 

PRISONER,  lies  to  receive  a  prisoner  committed  for  debt,  227,  228. 

lies  not  as  to  the  food  of  prisoners,  228. 

lies  to  make  allowances  to  prisoners,  228. 

lies  to  grant  depositions  under  stat.  6  &  7  Wm.  4,  c.  114 — 22S. 

lies  not  to  produce  depositions,  228. 
PRIVATE  INSTITUTIONS,  228. 
PRIVILEGE,  lies  to  restore  to  a  privilege,  326. 

PRIVY  COUNCIL,  JUDICIAL  COMMITTEE  OF,  lies  not  to  rehear  a  case, 
228. 

lies  not  to  receive  a  petition  to  rehear  a  case,  228. 
PRIVY  SEAL,  writ  of,  1,  n.  (a). 

form  of,  436. 
PROCEEDINGS  in  mandamus  cases  assimilated  to  those  of  personal  actions, 

7,  8  n.  (y). 
PROCTOR,  lies  not  for  the  office  of,  228,  229. 

lies  not  to  admit,  &c.,  22. 
PROVOST  OF  COLLEGE,  229. 
PROVOST  OF  ETON,  229. 
PUBLIC  SAFETY,  lies  to  command  a  matter  of,  31. 


Q. 

QUARE  IMPEDIT,  when  remedy  by,  is  a  bar,  26,  213. 
QUARTER  SESSIONS,  lies  to  hear  a  complaint  at,  230. 
return,  230. 

lies  to  hear  and  determine,  230,  231. 

lies  to  hear  an  appeal,  231,  232,  233,  234,  237. 
application,  2-34. 
costs,  234,  235. 

lies  not  to  grant  a  case,  235. 

lies  to  state  a  case,  235, 236. 

lies  not  to  rehear,  236,  237. 
application,  237. 

lies  not  to  review  a  decision,  2-37. 

lies  to  enforce  a  judgment  of  Quarter  Sessions,  237. 

lies  to  award  costs,  where,  237. 

lies  to  erase  a  falsity  from  a  record  of  Quarter  Sessions,  2.37,  238. 

lies  to  make  up  a  record,  238,  239. 

lies  for  performance  of  duties  by  Petty  Sessions,  239,  240. 

lies  to  grant  a  warrant,  240,  241,  242. 
application,  242. 
rule  service,  242. 
QUASHING  WRIT,  grounds  of,  309,  336,  et  seq. 

bad  direction,  314. 

misnomer  of  corporate  body,  314. 

misdescription  of  locality,  315,  et  seq. 

insufficiency  in  substance,  322. 

in  mandatory  clause,  327. 

error  or  repugnance  in  writ,  328. 

error  in  teste  and  return,  329. 

motion  for,  338. 

■when  made,  338. 

costs  of,  339. 

Return — see  Mandamus,  Writ  of,  tit.  Return, 
QUEEN,  242. 
QUEEN'S  PRISON,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  312. 


INDEX.  529 

QUO  WARRANTO  INFORMATION,  remedy  by,  when  a  bar  to  writ,  26, 
81,  99,  166,  180,  181,  191,  304,  305. 
when  not,  27,  99,  100,  166, 180, 181, 191. 


R. 

RAILWAY,  lies  to  compel  performance  of  duties  by  company,  131,  243,  244. 
rule,  244. 
returns,  244. 
lies  to  reinstate,  24,  243. 

lies  not  to  command  railway  company  to  carry  goods,  244. 
lies  to  hear  appeal  under  a  railway  act,  245. 
RATE,  form  of  writ  to  quash,  13. 

lies  to  make  rate,  66,  121,  134,  220. 
READING,  lies  for  restoration  of  steward  of,  245. 
READING  COURT,  lies  for  attorney  to  practise  in,  43. 
RECEIVER  OF  BEDFORD  LEVEL,  24.5. 
RECORD— see  tit.  Plea. 

entry  on — see  tit.  Entry. 
RECORDER,  lies  for  office  of,  when,  26,  245. 
lies  to  elect,  245. 
application,  245. 
rule,  245,  303. 
returns,  245,  246. 
lies  to  admit,  246. 
returns,  246. 
lies  to  restore,  246,  247. 

returns,  247. 
lies  to  swear  in  deputy  recorder,  247. 
form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  312. 
RECORDS,  237,  247. 
REFUSAL,  form  of,  285. 

what  amounts  to,  285,  286. 

necessary  to  ground  application  for  writ,  162,  163,  283,  285. 

by  whom  to  be  made,  286. 

affidavits  of  must  set  forth  the  fact,  but  not  the  reasons,  286,  287,  294. 

may  be  amended  in  this  respect,  294. 
when  want  of  demand  and  refusal  can  be  taken  advantage  of,  287,  290, 

291. 
averment  in  writ  of  demand  and  refusal,  323. 
REGISTER  OF  DEAN  AND  CHAPTER,  247. 

LIVINGS,  248. 

MIDDLESEX,  lies  to  register  a  deed,  248. 

REGISTRAR  OF  ARCHBISHOP  OF  YORK'S  COURT,  lies  to  admit 
and  swear  deputy,  23,  248. 

ARCHDEACON,  lies  to  admit,  249. 

return,  249. 
lies  to  restore,  249. 

—  BIRTHS,  lies  not  to  erase  or  alter  a  register  of  birth. 


248. 

BISHOP'S  COURT,  lies  to  restore,  249. 


lies  to  admit  deputy  of,  249. 

—  CONSISTORY  COURT,  lies  for  delivery  of  rolls,  249, 


250. 
lies  to  swear  in  deputy,  2.3. 

ECCLESIASTICAL  COURT,  lies  to  restore,  250. 

BEDFORD. LEVEL,  250. 

MARRIAGE,  lies  to  issue  a  certificate  of  marriage,  248. 


REGISTRATION,  250. 
June,  1852.— 34 


530  tapping's    mandamus. 

REGISTRATION  OF  DEED,  250. 
REGIUS  PROFESSOR,  250. 
REHEARING,  110,  236,  250. 

when  it  lies  to  rehear,  13,  41. 
REIMBURSEMENT,  when  it  lies  for,  74,  90,  120, 121,  135, 
REJOINDER— see  tit.  Picas. 
REMOVAL,  from  office— see  tit.  Office. 
REPLICATION— see  tit.  Pleas. 
REQUESTS,  COURT  OF,  250. 
RESIANT,  150,  250. 
RESTITUTION,  writ  of,  3,  4,  n.  (i),  (</). 
RESTORATION  TO  OFFICES— see  tit.  Office. 
RETURN  TO  WRIT— see  tit.  Writ  of  Mandamus  (Return). 

of  peremptory  writ — see  tit.  Peremptory  Writ. 
RETURN  DAY  OF  WKVY— see  Ui.  Writ  of  Mandamus. 
RETURNING  OFFICERS,  lies  to  appoint  them,  2.50. 
REVIEW  OF  JUDGMENT,  111,  237. 
REVISING  BARRISTERS'  COURT,  250. 
RIOTS,  lies  to  inquire  of  damages  by  rioters,  250,  251. 

lies  to  hear  appeal  against  decision  of  Quarter  Sessions,  251. 
lies  not  to  make  a  rate  for  payment  of  damages,  when,  251. 
ROAD,  131,  132,  251. 
ROLLS,  161,  162,  258. 

delivery  by  an  attorney,  45. 
ROYAL  MANOR,  154,  157. 
RUGBY  CHARITY,  trustees  of,  251. 
RULE,  for  writ  of  mandamus. 

application  for — see  tit.  Application  for  Rule  for  Writ. 

how  obtained,  295,  298. 

motion  for,  5,  295. 

to  what  Court,  5,  295. 

when  to  be  made,  b. 

when  granted  nisi,  5,  6,  297. 

under  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21 — 6. 
when  granted  absolute  in  first  instance,  297,  298. 
how  obtained,  298. 
form  of,  299. 

under  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21—299. 
when  Court  will  suggest  the  form,  299. 
what  should  be  expressed  in  it,  299. 
irregularity  in  form,  299. 
parties  to  rule,  263,  n.  (s),  299. 
requisites  in,  299,  300. 
time  to  shew  cause  against,  300. 
service  of  rule,  how  made,  300. 
notice  of  rule,  where  essential,  268,  n.  (s),  300. 
affidavit  of  service  and  notice,  when  to  be  made,  300. 
enlarging,  when  allowed,  301. 
shewmg  cause,  how,  6,  301. 

as  to  requisite  affidavits,  documents,  &.C.  301,  302. 
what  matter  may  be  shewn  as  cause  against  the  rule,  301,  302. 
who  may  shew  cause,  302. 

under  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  s.  4—302. 
Ahsolute,  when  granted,  5,  9,  303,  304. 
there  must  be  an  absence  of  a  specific  legal  remedy,  5,  n.  {h),  9,  10,  12, 

18,  19,  .53,  n.  (r). 
both  at  common  law,  and  by  statute,  18,  19. 
notwithstanding  unavailing,  18. 
if  mandamus  more  efficacious,  it  will  be  granted,  19. 


INDEX.  531 

RULE — continued. 

whctlier  private  security  bars  remedy,  qiicere,  19. 

it  will  be  granted,  if  it  be  doubtful  wliether  tbere  be  a  remedy,  10. 

or  if  the  remedy  be  obsolete,  5,  n.  (/i),  19,  20. 

or  if  inconvenient,  19. 

but  not  if  it  be  merely  suspended,  24. 

or  unfruitful,  24 — see  tit.  Execution. 

the  absence  of  a  specific  legal  remedy  must  appear  on  affidavits,  294. 

averment  in  writ  of  no  specific  remedy,  323. 

the  following  remedies  are  a  bar: 

action,  9,  20,  23,  46,  53,  79,  n.  (ar). 

amercement,  9. 

appeal,  9,  21. 

case,  9,  21. 

distress,  9,  21,  86,  119. 

ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  9. 

equity,  9,  22,  46,  97,  146,  159,  160. 

lis  pendens,  9,  35. 

error,  9,  23. 

execution,  9,  23. 

fees,  withholding,  9,  21,  24. 
action  for,  9,  21,  21. 

feigned  issue,  9,  24. 

indictment,  9,  98. 

quiEre  impedit,  9,  114,213. 

quo  warranto,  9,  191 — see  tit.  Quo  Warranto. 
the  writ  will  not  be  granted  if  it  must  be  nugatory,  15. 

vain,  15. 

fruitless,  15. 

useless,  1.5. 

if  it  cannot  have  a  beneficial  effect,  15. 

if  unnecessary,  15. 

where  object  of  writ  can  be  obtained  without  it,  15. 

or  if  writ  must  ultimately  fail,  15. 

must  be  for  a  proper  purpose,  16. 

not  fot"  gratification  of  curiosity,  16. 

or  if  it  may  introduce  disorder,  16. 

or  be  vexatious,  16. 

or  improper,  16. 

or  absurd,  16. 

or  indecorous,  16. 

or  become  subject  of  indictment,  16. 

or  be  illegal,  16. 

or  cannot  be  legally  enforced,  16,  17. 

or  not  authorized  by  law,  17. 

or  to  exercise  a  doubtful  jurisdiction,  17. 

defendant  must  have  a  legal  capacity  to  do  the  act,  17. 

not  granted  for  the  sake  of  a  return,  17. 

nor  against  an  inferior  ministerial  officer,  17,  25. 

nor  for  the  redress  of  a  private  wrong,  5,  11,  64,  118,  140. 

nor  where  the  execution  of  the  command  would  subject  to  an   ac- 
tion, 17. 

or   where  the  execution   would   subject  to  penalty   under  revenue 
laws,  17. 

but  granted  for  execution  of  an  act  of  Parliament,  although  penalty 
imposed  on  nonperformance,  31. 

nor  when  it  would  interfere  with  a  statutory  protection,  32. 

will  be  granted  to  prevent  failure  of  justice,  5,  15,  30. 

to  provide  an  immediate  remedy,  1.5. 


532  tapping's   mandamus. 

RULE — continued. 

efficacious  remedy,  15. 

to  effect  justice,  9,  10,  20. 

to  enforce  official  duties,  9. 

to  enforce  general  law  of  land,  20. 

again"?t  whom  rule  absolute  granted,  305. 

form  of,  o05. 

liow  obtained,  30G. 

costs  of  rule,  291,  806 — sec  tit.  Costs. 

atnemhnent  of  rule,  806. 

compelling  prosecutor  to  proceed  with  rule,  306,  307. 

rule  to  2)lead — see  tit.  Flea. 

to  rc])hj — see  tit.  Plea. 

to  return  writ,  844,  345. 

nisi  for  costs,  421. 

for  attachment,  423. 
RULES,  ORDERS,  AND  REGULATIONS,  in  pursuance  of  6  Vict.  c.  20, 

461. 
RULE  TO  RETURN,  writ,  344. 
RUSSIA  COMPANY,  251. 


S. 


SACRAMENT,  lies  to  administer,  25L 

return  of  non-celebration  of,  5.5,  251. 
ST.  MARTYN  LE  GRAND,  COURT  OF,  251. 

lies  to  restore  attorney  of,  44. 
SALARY,  252. 

SAVINGS'  BANK,  lies  to  appoint  an  arbitrator,  252. 
SCAVENGER,  lies  for  office  of,  253. 

lies  to  appoint,  253. 

lies  to  perform  duties  of,  253. 

lies  to  admit,  258. 

lies  to  swear  in,  253. 
SCHOLARSHIP,  258. 
SCHOOL,  lies  for  the  schoolmaster  of  a  public  school,  253,  254. 

lies  to  license  him,  254. 
returns  thereto,  254. 

lies  to  admit,  254. 

lies  to  restore,  2.54. 

lies  to  license  the  teacher  of  a  public  school,  254. 

lies  to  admit  such  a  teacher,  2.54. 

lies  to  license  the  under  master  of  a  public  school,  23,  254. 

lies  to  restore  such  an  officer,  255. 

lies  for  the  usher  of  a  public  school,  255. 

lies  to  license  such  an  usher,  255. 

lies  to  restore  such  an  officer,  255. 
SCHOOLMASTER,  2.55. 

SCRIVENERS'  COMPA'VY,  lies  to  admit  and  swear  in  to  freedom  of,  255. 
SEAL,  AFFIXING,  80,  96,  256. 

lies  to  seal  letters  of  administration,  34. 
SECONDARY  OF  CLERK  OF  THE  CROWN,  lies  to  swear  in,  256. 
SECOND  CURATE,  2.56. 

SECRETARY  OF  THE  COURT  OF  MARCHES,  256. 
SECURITY  FOR  COSTS,  421. 
SERJEANT,  lies  for  office  of,  256. 


INDEX.  533 

SERJEANT  OF  THE  MACE,  lies  not  to  swear  in,  256. 
lies  to  restore,  256. 
lies  not  to  deliver  up  mace,  &,c.  256. 
SERVICE  OF  WRIT— sec  tit.  Writ  of  Mandarnus. 
SERVUS,  return  of,  71. 
SESSIONS,  ORDER  OF,  lies  not  to  county  treasurer  to  obey,  25,  290. 

(BOROUGH),  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  312. 

(COUNTY),  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  312. 

(PETTY),  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  312. 

SEVERN,  WATER  BAILIFF  OF,  lies  not  to  restore,  256,  257. 
SEWERS,  lies  to  exempt  from  expenditorship,  257. 
\yhen  lies  not  for  sewer's  rate,  15. 

lies  not  for  payment  for  repairs,  under  15  Can  2,  c.  17 — 21. 
SEXTON,  lies  for  office  of,  257. 
lies  to  elect,  257. 
lies  to  admit,  257. 
lies  to  swear  in,  257. 
lies  to  restore,  257,  25S. 
returns  thereto,  258. 
SHARES,  258. 
SHERIFF,  lies  to  swear  in,  2.58. 

lies  to  compel  performance  of  duties,  258. 
lies  to  compel  delivery  of  rolls,  258. 
form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  312. 
SHERIFFS'  COURT,  259. 

SHERIFFS'  COURT,  LONDON,  JUDGE  OF,  lies  to  swear  in,  259. 
SHIP,  lies  to  register,  259. 

lies  to  grant  certificate  of  registration,  259. 
SIDESMEN,  lies  to  elect,  259. 
lies  to  swear  in,  259. 
rule,  259,  298. 
SISTER  OF  HOSPITAL,  259. 
SKINNERS  COMPANY,  ASSISTANT  OF,  260. 
SLANDER  of  superior  officer,  return  of,  39,  40,  197. 
SOUTHWARK  BOROUGH  COURT  OF,  260. 
lies  to  restore  attorney  of,  44. 
form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  312. 
SPECIAL  CASE,  in  mandamus  cases,  411. 

practice  of,  411. 
SPECIFIC  LEGAL  REMEDY— see  tit.  iJ^Jc /or  Writ. 
SPIRITUAL  COURT,  260. 

lies  not  for  subject  of  litigation  in,  23. 
STALL,  260. 

STANNARIES  COURT,  260. 
STATUTES — see  tit.  Jurisdiction. 
STATUTES, 
English, 

9  Anne,  c.  20—439. 
1  Geo.  1,  s.  2,  c.  13—440. 
11  Geo.  1,  c.  4—442. 
11  Geo.  3,  c.  21—444. 
38  Geo.  3,  c.  52—445. 
1  Wm.  4,  c.  21—446. 
1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  .58—448. 
1  Vict.  c.  76—4.50. 
6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67—451. 
6  &  7  Vict.  c.  89—4.53. 

19  Geo.  2,  c.  12—455. 


5;U  T  A  r  r  I N  G '  s    m  a  n  d  a  m  u  s. 

STATUTES— con/MjweJ. 

1  VVm.  4,  c.  21— 457. 
1  &  2  Wm.  4,  c.  58—457. 
9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113—458. 
STATUTE  DUTY,  260. 

STATUTORY  REMEDY,  when  writ  granted  notwithstanding,  19. 
STEPNEY  COURT,  lies  for  attorney  to  practise  in,  41. 
STEWARD,  lies  to  restore,  260. 

lies  to  swear  in  liif^h  steward,  260. 
STEWARD  OF  COURT  BARON,  260. 

OF  COPYHOLD  COURT,  260. 

OF  COURT  LEET,  260. 

STIPENDIARY  CURATE,  260. 

STOCK,  lies  not  for  transfer  of  Bank  stock,  20. 

STRATFORD  UPON  AVON,  STEWARD  OF,  lies  to  restore  of,  260. 

SUBPOENA,  388— see  tit.  Plea. 

SUBSTANCE  (of  Writ), 

insufficiency  in  consequence  of,  310, 

ground  for  quashing,  322. 
SUMMONS,  when  necessary  before  a  motion,  40,  200,  201,  202. 

when  allegation  of,  necessary  to  a  return,  195,  200,  201,  212,  213. 

for  what  offices  necessary,  201,  202. 

form  of  summons,  202. 

allegation  of  summons  in  return,  202,  203. 

return  of  no  summons,  40. 
SUPERSEDEAS,  grounds  of,  6,  309—335. 

when  writ  for  administration  letters  supersedable,  35,  36. 

bad  direction,  314,  et  seq. 

error  or  repugnance  in  writ,  328. 

error  in  teste  or  return,  329. 

motion  for,  335. 

when  to  be  made,  336. 

rule  thereon,  336. 
SURGEON,  260. 
SURGEONS'  COMPANY,  200. 
SURVEYORS  OF  HIGH  WAYS,  261. 
SURVEYOR  OF  NEW  RIVER,  261. 
SUSPENSION  FROM  OFFICE,  lies  for,  when,  190,  191. 
SWEAR  INTO  OFFICE,  lies  to,  38. 
SWORDBEARER,  lies  to  restore,  261. 

T. 

TAXATION  OF  COSTS,  261. 

wi)ere  taxed,  and  how,  421. 
TEACHER,  261. 
TEMPORALITIES   OF   CHURCH,  lies  not   to  interfere   with   visitatorial 

power,  20 
THAMES  COURT  OF  CONSERVANCY,  261. 
TESTE  OF  WKI'l' — see  tit.  Writ  of  Mandamus. 
TITHE,  lies  to  inquire  as  to  a  modus  under  an  inclosure  act,  261. 

lies  not  to  compel  tithe  commissioners  to  make  award,  261. 

lies  not  to  sumuion  a  compensation  jury,  261. 

as  to  slatmg  a  case  under  stat.  6  &  7  Wm.  4,  c.  71 — 261. 
TITHE  COMMISSIONERS,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311. 
TITLE,  261. 

to  writ,  averment  of  prosecutor's,  320,  321. 

TIVERTON,  TWENTY-FOUR  MEN  OF,  262. 

lies  to  swear  in,  43. 


INDEX.  535 

TOLERATION  ACT,  lies  to  administer  oaths  of,  262— see  tit.  Oaths. 

TOLLS,  262. 

TOLT,  262. 

TOLZEY  COURT  OF  BRISTOL,  262. 

TOTHILL  FIELDS  BRIDEWELL,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  313. 

TOWER,  LIEUTENANT  OF,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  311,  313. 

TOWN  CLERK,  lies  for  office  of,  262. 

lies  to  elect,  262. 
return,  262. 

lies  to  admit  and  swear  in,  262,  263. 
returns,  263. 

lies  to  restore,  263,  264. 
returns,  264. 

lies  for  delivery  of  records,  264 — see  tit.  Records. 
TOWN  COUNCILLOR  OR  COUNCILMAN,  265. 
TRADE  MARK,  265. 
TRADING  CORPORATION,  265. 

TRAVERSE— see  tits.  Writ  of  Mandamus  (Return),  Plea. 
TREASURER  OF  COUNTY,  265. 
TREASURER  OF  GUARDIANS  OF  POOR,  265. 
TREASURER  OF  NEW  RIVER,  265. 
TREASURY,  LORDS  OF,  lies  to,  in  some  cases,  265,  266. 

lies  to,  to  hear  appeals,  266. 
TRIAL,  rule,  266. 

notice  of,  3S8. 

at  bar,  389. 

at  nisi  prius,  389. 

jeofails,  389. 

amendments,  390. 

how  affected  by  3  «&  4  Wm.  4,  c.  42,  e.  23,  <SiC.  390. 

verdict,  392. 

for  plaintiff,  392. 

for  defendant,  392. 

damages,  7,  192,  393. 

costs  after  verdict,  when  and  how  recovered,  7,  394 — see  tit.  Costs. 

judgment,  395. 
TRINITY  HOUSE  HALL,  lies  to  restore  to,  266. 
TRUST,  lies  not  for,  26,  266. 

TRUSTEES,  lies  to  hold  a  meeting  of  trustees,  under  a  local  act,  266. 
TURKEY  COMPANY,  266. 
TURNPIKE  TRUSTEES,  266.  * 

U. 

UMPIRE,  266. 

when  granted  to  appoint,  42. 
UNDERMASTER  OF  SCHOOL,  266. 
UNIVERSITY,  lies  to  command  University  to  do  its  duty,  267. 

lies  not  to  admit  member,  267. 

lies  not  to  admit  to  academical  degrees,  267. 

lies  not  to  restore  to  academical  degrees,  267,  263. 
returns,  268. 

lies  to  appoint  a  Regius  Professor,  268. 

lies  to  appoint  High  Steward,  268. 

lies  to  remove  scholar,  268,  269. 

lies  to  restore  scholar,  269. 

lies  to  restore  Bannitus,  2,  269. 
USAGE,  will  not  be  granted  against,  28,  115. 
USHER  OF  SCHOOL,  269. 


536  tapping's   mandamus. 


VENIRE  FACIAS  JURATORES— see  tit.  Plea. 
VERDICT— see  tit.  Trial. 
VERGER  OF  ST.  PAUL'S,  lies  to  restore,  269. 
VESTRY,  lies  to  hold  vestry,  270. 

lies  not  to  deliver  vestry  books,  21,  270. 

lies  to  form  select  vestry,  270,  271. 

lies  to  appoint  select  vestrymen,  271. 

lies  not  to  admit  vestry  clerk,  271. 
VICAR,  lies  to  affix  seal  to  presentation  of  vicar,  271. 
VICE  MASTER,  271. 

VICE  CHANCELLOR  OF  UNIVERSITY,  271. 
VILL,  CLERK  OF,  lies  to  restore,  271. 
VISITATION,  lies  not  to  provide  necessaries  for,  272, 

VISITOR,  lies  not  in  respect  of  matters  within  visitatorial  jurisdiction,  10, 
20,  29,  30,  76,  77,  78,  79,  80,  262,  273,  274. 

lies  to  exercise  visitatorial  office,  274,  275. 
VOLUNTARY  DUTY— see  tit.  Discretion. 

lies  not  to  enforce,  13. 
VOTE,  275. 


W. 

W^AGES,  lies  to  assess  rate  of,  31,  275. 

WARDEN  OF  COLLEGE,  276. 

WARRANT,  67,  276. 

WATER  BAILIFF,  276. 

WATER  HOUSE,  MASTER  OF,  lies  not  for,  276. 

WATERWORKS,  lies  not  for  office  of,  276. 

WAY,  276. 

WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES,  lies  to  recompense  inspector  of,  276. 

lies  to  investigate  accounts  of,  276. 
WESTiMINSTER,  HIGH  BAILIFF  OF,  lies  to  admit,  276. 
WHITE  CROSS  STREET  PRISON,  form  of  direction  of  writ  to,  313. 
WHITSTABLE,  FREEFISHERS  OF,  lies  to  restore,  277. 
WIGAN,  INN  BURGESS  OF,  277. 
WILL,  lies  to  gr^t  probate,  277. 

rule,  278,  298. 

writ,  form  of,  278. 

returns  thereto,  278,  279. 

lies  to  allow  an  executor  to  renounce,  279. 

lies  to  command  Commissioners  of  Stamps  to  repay  a  sum  of  money  re- 
ceived by  them  in  excess  of  duty,  279. 

lies  not  to  deliver  a  will  to  heir,  &c.,  when,  279,  230. 

lies  to  transmit  a  will,  230. 

lies  to  enrol  a  will,  280. 

lies  to  enter  it  on  books  of  company,  83. 
WITNESS,  lies  not  to  a  county  treasurer  to  pay  expenses  of,  230. 
WOODWARD  OF  LONDON,  lies  to  restore  to  office  of,  280. 
WOOD  WHARF,  YEOMAN  OF,  280. 

WORKS,  lies  to  execute  works  in  pursuance  of  act  of  Parliament,  280. 
WRIT  OF  MANDAMUS,  species  of  mandamus,  1. 
special  mandamus,  1,  n.  (a), 
royal  mandamus,  1,  n.  (a), 
mandamus  from  Chancery,  1,  n.  (a). 


INDEX.  537 

WRIT  OF  MANDAMUS— continued. 
origin  of  writ,  1. 
history,  1,  4. 

as  letter  missive,  3,  435,  436. 
as  parliamentary  writ,  8,  437. 
as  judicial  writ,  3,  437. 
definition  of,  4. 

not  a  writ  of  right,  4,  18, 
jurisdiction  of,  296 — see  tit.  Jurisdiction. 
by  whom  prepared,  308. 
form  of,  5,  309. 
requisites  of,  309. 

must  be  in  accordance  with  rule,  295. 
how  far  principles  and  rules  of  pleading  in  civil  actions  are  applicable, 

309. 
form  of  inducement,  309. 
form  of  averments,  309. 
if  writ  defective  in  form  liable  to  be  superseded  or  quashed,  309,  310,  314, 

ib.  317,  318,  322,  327,  335,  336,  et  seq. 
substance  of  writ,  310. 

must  be  in  strict  accordance  with  rule,  310. 
when  sufficient,  310. 

consequence  of  insufficiency  in  substance,  310. 
direction  of,  310. 

forms  of,  311,  312,  313. 

to  whom  directed,  311,  312,  313,  314. 

under  1  VVm.  4,  c.  21,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113—313. 
in  cases  of  joint  acts,  220  n.  (e),  221  n.  (p),  314. 
to  corporate  body,  314. 

what  it  should  contain,  314,  315,  316,  317. 
to  officers,  317. 
to  colleges,  317. 
to  inhabitants  of  parish,  317. 
parish  officer  direction  against  fellow  officer,  317. 
to  justices,  318. 

how  misdirection  waived,  318,  319. 
how  taken  advantage  of,  318,319. 
inducements,  319. 

averments,  319,  320,  321,  322,  323. 
of  courts  jurisdiction,  319,  320i 
of  prosecutor's  title,  320,  321. 
of  defendant's  duty,  322. 
of  demand  and  refusal,  323. 
the  mandatory  clause,  323. 
substance  of,  324. 
what  necessary,  325. 

at  instance  of  whom  may  the  writ  command,  325. 
difference  in  substance  of  clause  between  judicial  and  ministerial 

acts,  176,  177,  325. 
as  to  acts  of  Parliament,  325,  327. 
form  of,  325. 

alternative  clause,  326. 
what  it  should  allege,  326,  327. 
value  of  the  term  "  forthwith,"  328. 
return  day,  328. 
when  writ  felo  de  se,  328. 
teste  and  return  day,  6,  328,  329. 
error  in,  consequence  of,  329. 
as  to  amendment  of  teste,  329. 


538  TAPriNG's      MANDAMUS. 

WRIT  OF  MANDAMUS— continued. 

liow  far  practice  affected  by  rule  and  Crown  Office  rules, 

323. 
endorsements,  330. 
how  made,  330. 
how  sued  out,  330. 
how  served,  6,  330,  331. 
filling  the  writ,  331. 
cross  or  concurrent  writs,  331. 
when  granted,  70,  331. 
motion  for,  331,  322. 
rule  thereon,  332. 
affidavits  for  cross  writs,  332. 
argument  of  rule,  332. 
returns  to  cross  writs,  333. 
costs  as  to  cross  writs,  333. 

alias  or  pluries  writ  when  granted,  333,  334,335. 
rendered  unnecessary  in  ordinary  cases  by  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21 

-6,7. 
amendment  of  writ,  G,  334,  33-5. 
supersedeas,  when  made,  6,  335. 
motion  for,  335. 
when  made,  336. 

rule  thereon,  336 — see  tit.  Supersedeas. 
quashing  writ,  6,  336. 
grounds  for,  336. 
motion  for,  333. 
when  made,  338. 
costs  of,  339 — see  tit.  Quashing  Writ. 

Return,  by  whom  made,  340,  242,  343, 

individuals,  340. 

corporations,  341. 

in  cases  within  stat.  1  Wm.  4,  c.  21,  and  9  &  10  Vict.  c.  113—342. 

application,  &c.  343. 

by  several  corporations,  officers,  &c,  343. 

when  to  be  made,  6,  7,  344. 

how  enforced,  6,  344. 

rule  to  return  writ,  344,  34.5. 

consequence  of  neglect  to  obey  rule,  345. 

when  return  necessary,  346. 

what  it  is,  336. 

what  should  be  returned,  6,  336,  346,  347. 

description  of  defendants,  347. 

relation  of  return  as  to  time,  347. 

Return,  Species  of,  347. 

1st,  traverse,  7,  343. 

form  of  traverse,  73,  100,  347,  348. 
substance  of  traverse,  349. 
2nd,  special  return  as  in  confession  and  avoidance,  347,  351. 
fotm  of  ditto,  351. 
substance  of  ditto,  358. 
3rd,  in  nature  of  a  demurrer,  347,  362. 
certainly  in,  350,  3.53,  et  seq. 
negative  pregnant,  350. 
want  of — conseciuence  of,  357. 
double  or  several  returns,  3G0. 
cff  repugnant  and  inconsistent  returns,  360. 
what  is  fatal  defect  in,  361. 
grounds  for  quashing,  359,  361,  362. 


INDEX.  539 

WRIT  OF  MANDAMUS— continued. 

Return — continued. 

engrossing,  303. 
signing  and  sealing,  363. 

by  individuals,  303. 

by  corporations,  363, 
swearing  to,  102,  364. 
filing,  345,  305. 

necessity  of  ditto,  when  filed,  365. 
consequence  of  neglect  in  not  filing,  365. 
how  filed,  366. 
staying  filing,  366. 
taking  off  file,  367. 
withdrawing,  367. 

disavowing,  342,  367. 

amendment  of,  368,  369 — see  tit.  Amendment. 

invalidating,  369. 
rules  as  to  construction  of  return,  370,  et  seq. 
motion  to  quash,  372. 
when  granted,  7,  8,  372,  373. 
application  to,  374. 
affidavits,  when  necessary,  374. 
rule  nisi  for  quashing,  374. 

shewing  cause,  374. 

what  defendant  may  shew,  8,  374. 
rule  absolute  for  quashing,  when  granted,  375. 

how  drawn  up  and  entered,  375. 

• ' Demurrer  to,  7,  8,  375,  376,  377. 

joinder  in  demurrer,  377. 

proceedings  in,  8,  377. 

form  of  rule,  377. 
paper  books,  378. 

delivery  of,  378. 

nature  of,  378. 
rule  to  inspect,  378. 

in  what  cases  granted,  379. 

Argument,  379. 

what  objections  are  valid,  8,  379. 
when  to  be  made,  379. 

Judgment,  380. 

how  affected  by  6  &  7  Vict.  c.  67,  s.  1. 
form  of,  380,  n. 
peremptory  mandamus,  8. 
costs  of,  380 — see  further  title  Plea. 
ancient  forms  of  writ  of,  see  435,  438. 
WRIT  DE  NON  MOLEST ANDO,  mandamus  has  not  effect  of,  10,  11,   119. 


YOEMAN  OF  WOOD  WHARF,  lies  to  restore,  281. 
YORK,  SHERIFF'S  COURT  OF,  281. 

lies  to  admit  to,  44. 

lies  to  restore  to,  44. 


THE   END. 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA    000  819  090    2 


